__________________________________________________________________
Title: The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume 6: Fathers of the
Church-Gregory XI
Creator(s): Herbermann, Charles George (1840-1916)
Print Basis: 1907-1913
Rights: From online edition Copyright 2003 by K. Knight, used by
permission
CCEL Subjects: All; Reference
LC Call no: BX841.C286
LC Subjects:
Christian Denominations
Roman Catholic Church
Dictionaries. Encyclopedias
__________________________________________________________________
THE CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA
AN INTERNATIONAL WORK OF REFERENCE
ON THE CONSTITUTION, DOCTRINE,
DISCIPLINE, AND HISTORY OF THE
CATHOLIC CHURCH
EDITED BY
CHARLES G. HERBERMANN, Ph.D., LL.D.
EDWARD A. PACE, Ph.D., D.D. CONDE B PALLEN, Ph.D., LL.D.
THOMAS J. SHAHAN, D.D. JOHN J. WYNNE, S.J.
ASSISTED BY NUMEROUS COLLABORATORS
IN FIFTEEN VOLUMES
VOLUME 6
Fathers of the Church to Gregory XI
New York: ROBERT APPLETON COMPANY
Imprimatur
JOHN M. FARLEY
ARCHBISHOP OF NEW YORK
__________________________________________________________________
Fathers of the Church
Fathers of the Church
+ The Appeal to the Fathers
+ Classification of Patristic Writings
o Apostolic Fathers and the Second Century
o Third Century
o Fourth Century
o Fifth Century
o Sixth Century
+ Characteristics of Patristic Writings
o Commentaries
o Preachers
o Writers
o East and West
o Theology
o Discipline, Liturgy, Ascetics
o Historical Materials
+ Patristic Study
The word Father is used in the New Testament to mean a teacher
of spiritual things, by whose means the soul of man is born
again into the likeness of Christ: "For if you have ten thousand
instructors in Christ, yet not many fathers. For in Christ
Jesus, by the gospel, I have begotten you. Wherefore I beseech
you, be ye followers of me, as I also am of Christ" (I Cor., iv,
15, 16; cf. Gal., iv, 19). The first teachers of Christianity
seem to be collectively spoken of as "the Fathers" (II Peter,
iii, 4).
Thus St. Irenaeus defines that a teacher is a father, and a
disciple is a son (iv, 41,2), and so says Clement of Alexandria
(Strom., I, i, 1). A bishop is emphatically a "father in
Christ", both because it was he, in early times, who baptized
all his flock, and because he is the chief teacher of his
church. But he is also regarded by the early Fathers, such as
Hegesippus, Irenaeus, and Tertullian as the recipient of the
tradition of his predecessors in the see, and consequently as
the witness and representative of the faith of his Church before
Catholicity and the world. Hence the expression "the Fathers"
comes naturally to be applied to the holy bishops of a preceding
age, whether of the last generation or further back, since they
are the parents at whose knee the Church of today was taught her
belief. It is also applicable in an eminent way to bishops
sitting in council, "the Fathers of Nicaea", "the Fathers of
Trent". Thus Fathers have learnt from Fathers, and in the last
resort from the Apostles, who are sometimes called Fathers in
this sense: "They are your Fathers", says St. Leo, of the
Princes of the Apostles, speaking to the Romans; St. Hilary of
Arles calls them sancti patres; Clement of Alexandria says that
his teachers, from Greece, Ionia, Coele-Syria, Egypt, the
Orient, Assyria, Palestine, respectively, had handed on to him
the tradition of blessed teaching from Peter, and James, and
John, and Paul, receiving it "as son from father".
It follows that, as our own Fathers are the predecessors who
have taught us, so the Fathers of the whole Church are
especially the earlier teachers, who instructed her in the
teaching of the Apostles, during her infancy and first growth.
It is difficult to define the first age of the Church, or the
age of the Fathers. It is a common habit to stop the study of
the early Church at the Council of Chalcedon in 451. "The
Fathers" must undoubtedly include, in the West, St. Gregory the
Great (d. 604), and in the East, St. John Damascene (d. about
754). It is frequently said that St. Bernard (d. 1153) was the
last of the Fathers, and Migne's "Patrologia Latina" extends to
Innocent III, halting only on the verge of the thirteenth
century, while his "Patrologia Graeca" goes as far as the
Council of Florence (1438-9). These limits are evidently too
wide, It will be best to consider that the great merit of St.
Bernard as a writer lies in his resemblance in style and matter
to the greatest among the Fathers, in spite of the difference of
period. St. Isidore of Seville (d. 636) and the Venerable Bede
(d. 735) are to be classed among the Fathers, but they may be
said to have been born out of due time, as St. Theodore the
Studite was in the East.
I. THE APPEAL TO THE FATHERS
Thus the use of the term Fathers has been continuous, yet it
could not at first he employed in precisely the modern sense of
Fathers of the Church. In early days the expression referred to
writers who were then quite recent. It is still applied to those
writers who are to us the ancients, but no longer in the same
way to writers who are now recent. Appeals to the Fathers are a
subdivision of appeals to tradition. In the first half of the
second century begin the appeals to the sub-Apostolic age:
Papias appeals to the presbyters, and through them to the
Apostles. Half a century later St. Irenaeus supplements this
method by an appeal to the tradition handed down in every Church
by the succession of its bishops (Adv. Haer., III, i-iii), and
Tertullian clinches this argument by the observation that as all
the Churches agree, their tradition is secure, for they could
not all have strayed by chance into the same error (Praescr.,
xxviii). The appeal is thus to Churches and their bishops, none
but bishops being the authoritative exponents of the doctrine of
their Churches. As late as 341 the bishops of the Dedication
Council at Antioch declared: "We are not followers of Arius; for
how could we, who are bishops, be disciples of a priest?"
Yet slowly, as the appeals to the presbyters died out, there was
arising by the side of appeals to the Churches a third method:
the custom of appealing to Christian teachers who were not
necessarily bishops. While, without the Church, Gnostic schools
were substituted for churches, within the Church, Catholic
schools were growing up. Philosophers like Justin and most of
the numerous second-century apologists were reasoning about
religion, and the great catechetical school of Alexandria was
gathering renown. Great bishops and saints like Dionysius of
Alexandria, Gregory Thaumaturgus of Pontus, Firmilian of
Cappadocia, and Alexander of Jerusalem were proud to be
disciples of the priest Origen. The Bishop Cyprian called daily
for the works of the priest Tertullian with the words "Give me
the master". The Patriarch Athanasius refers for the ancient use
of the word homoousios, not merely to the two Dionysii, but to
the priest Theognostus. Yet these priest-teachers are not yet
called Fathers, and the greatest among them, Tertullian,
Clement, Origen, Hippolytus, Novatian, Lucian, happen to be
tinged with heresy; two became antipopes; one is the father of
Arianism; another was condemned by a general council. In each
case we might apply the words used by St. Hilary of Tertullian:
"Sequenti errore detraxit scriptis probabilibus auctoritatem"
(Comm. in Matt., v, 1, cited by Vincent of Lerins, 2.4).
A fourth form of appeal was better founded and of enduring
value. Eventually it appeared that bishops as well as priests
were fallible. In the second century the bishops were orthodox.
In the third they were often found wanting. in the fourth they
were the leaders of schisms, and heresies, in the Meletian and
Donatist troubles and in the long Arian struggle, in which few
were found to stand firm against the insidious persecution of
Constantius. It came to be seen that the true Fathers of the
Church are those Catholic teachers who have persevered in her
communion, and whose teaching has been recognized as orthodox.
So it came to pass that out of the four "Latin Doctors" one is
not a bishop. Two other Fathers who were not bishops have been
declared to be Doctors of the Church, Bede and John Damascene,
while among the Doctors outside the patristic period we find two
more priests, the incomparable St. Bernard and the greatest of
all theologians, St. Thomas Aquinas. Nay, few writers had such
great authority in the Schools of the Middle Ages as the layman
Boethius, many of whose definitions are still commonplaces of
theology.
Similarly (we may notice in passing) the name "Father", which
originally belonged to bishops, has been as it were delegated to
priests, especially as ministers of the Sacrament of Penance. it
is now a form of address to all priests in Spain, in Ireland,
and, of recent years, in England and the United States.
Papas or Pappas, Pope, was a term of respect for eminent bishops
(e.g. in letters to St. Cyprian and to St. Augustine -- neither
of these writers seems to use it in addressing other bishops,
except when St. Augustine writes to Rome). Eventually the term
was reserved to the bishops of Rome and Alexandria; yet in the
East to-day every priest is a "pope". The Aramaic abbe was used
from early times for the superiors of religious houses. But
through the abuse of granting abbeys in commendam to seculars,
it has become a polite title for all secular clerics, even
seminarists in Italy, and especially in France, whereas all
religious who are priests are addressed as "Father".
We receive only, says St. Basil, what we have been taught by the
holy Fathers; and he adds that in his Church of Caesarea the
faith of the holy Fathers of Nicaea has long been implanted (Ep.
cxl, 2). St. Gregory Nazianzen declares that he holds fast the
teaching which he heard from the holy Oracles, and was taught by
the holy Fathers. These Cappadocian saints seem to be the first
to appeal to a real catena of Fathers. The appeal to one or two
was already common enough; but not even the learned Eusebius had
thought of a long string of authorities. St. Basil, for example
(De Spir. S., ii, 29), cites for the formula "with the Holy
Ghost" in the doxology, the example of Irenaeus, Clement and
Dionysius of Alexandria, Dionysius of Rome, Eusebius of
Caesarea, Origen, Africanus, the preces lucerariae said at the
lighting of lamps, Athenagoras, Gregory Thaumaturgus, Firmilian,
Meletius. In the fifth century this method became a stereotyped
custom. St. Jerome is perhaps the first writer to try to
establish his interpretation of a text by a string of exegetes
(Ep. cxii, ad Aug.). Paulinus, the deacon and biographer of St.
Ambrose, in the libellus he presented against the Pelagians to
Pope Zosimus in 417, quotes Cyprian, Ambrose, Gregory Nazianzen,
and the decrees of the late Pope Innocent. In 420 St. Augustine
quotes Cyprian and Ambrose against the same heretics (C. duas
Epp. Pel., iv). Julian of Eclanum quoted Chrysostom and Basil;
St. Augustine replies to him in 421 (Contra Julianum, i) with
Irenaeus, Cyprian, Reticius, Olympius, Hilary, Ambrose, the
decrees of African councils, and above all Popes Innocent and
Zosimus. In a celebrated passage he argues that these Western
writers are more than sufficient, but as Julian had appealed to
the East, to the East, he shall go, and the saint adds Gregory
Nazianzen, Basil, Synod of Diospolis, Chrysostom. To these he
adds Jerome (c. xxxiv): "Nor should you think Jerome, because he
was a priest, is to be despised", and adds a eulogy. This is
amusing, when we remember that Jerome in a fit of irritation,
fifteen before, had written to Augustine (Ep. cxlii) "Do not
excite against me the silly crowd of the ignorant, who venerate
you as a bishop, and receive you with the honour due to a
prelate when you declaim in the Church, whereas they think
little of me, an old man, nearly decrepit, in my monastery in
the solitude of the country."
In the second book "Contra Julianum", St. Augustine again cites
Ambrose frequently, and Cyprian, Gregory Nazianzen, Hilary,
Chrysostom; in ii, 37, he recapitulates the nine names (omitting
councils and popes), adding (iii, 32) Innocent and Jerome. A few
years later the Semipelagians of Southern Gaul, who were led by
St. Hilary of Arles, St. Vincent of Lerins, and Bl. Cassian,
refuse to accept St. Augustine's severe view of predestination
because "contrarium putant patrum opinioni et ecclesiastico
sensui". Their opponent St. Prosper, who was trying to convert
them to Augustinianism, complains: "Obstinationem suam vetustate
defendunt" (Ep. inter Atig. ccxxv, 2), and they said that no
ecclesiastical writer had ever before interpreted Romans quite
as St. Augustine did -- which was probably true enough. The
interest of this attitude lies in the fact that it was, if not
new at least more definite than any earlier appeal to antiquity.
Through most of the fourth century, the controversy with the
Arians had turned upon Scripture, and appeals to past authority
were few. But the appeal to the Fathers was never the most
imposing locus theologicus, for they could not easily be
assembled so as to form an absolutely conclusive test. On the
other hand up to the end of the fourth century, there were
practically no infallible definitions available, except
condemnations of heresies, chiefly by popes. By the time that
the Arian reaction under Valens caused the Eastern conservatives
to draw towards the orthodox, and prepared the restoration of
orthodoxy to power by Theodosius, the Nicene decisions were
beginning to be looked upon as sacrosanct, and that council to
be preferred to a unique position above all others. By 430, the
date we have reached, the Creed we now say at Mass was revered
in the East, whether rightly or wrongly, as the work of the 150
Fathers of Constantinople in 381, and there were also new papal
decisions, especially the tractoria of Pope Zosimus, which in
418 had been sent to all the bishops of the world to be signed.
It is to living authority, the idea of which had thus come to
the fore, that St. Prosper was appealing in his controversy with
the Lerinese school. When he went to Gaul, in 431, as papal
envoy, just after St. Augustine's death, he replied to their
difficulties, not by reiterating that saint's hardest arguments,
but by taking with him a letter from Pope St. Celestine, in
which St. Augustine is extolled as having been held by the
pope's predecessors to be "inter magistros optimos". No one is
to be allowed to depreciate him, but it is not said that every
word of his is to be followed. The disturbers had appealed to
the Holy See, and the reply is "Desinat incessere novitas
vetustatem" (Let novelty cease to attack antiquity!). An
appendix is added, not of the opinions of ancient Fathers, but
of recent popes, since the very same monks who thought St.
Augustine went too far, professed (says the appendix) "that they
followed and approved only what the most holy See of the Blessed
Apostle Peter sanctioned and taught by the ministry of its
prelates". A list therefore follows of "the judgments of the
rulers of the Roman Church", to which are added some sentences
of African councils, "which indeed the Apostolic bishops made
their own when they approved them". To these inviolabiles
sanctiones (we might roughly render "infallible utterances")
prayers used in the sacraments are appended "ut legem credendi
lex statuat supplicandi" -- a frequently misquoted phrase -- and
in conclusion, it is declared that these testimonies of the
Apostolic See are sufficient, "so that we consider not to be
Catholic at all whatever shall appear to be contrary to the
decisions we have cited". Thus the decisions of the Apostolic
See are put on a very different level from the views of St.
Augustine, just as that saint always drew a sharp distinction
between the resolutions of African councils or the extracts from
the Fathers, on the one hand, and the decrees of Popes Innocent
and Zosimus on the other.
Three years later a famous document on tradition and its use
emanated from the Lerinese school, the "Commonitorium" of St.
Vincent. He whole-heartedly accepted the letter of Pope
Celestine, and he quoted it as an authoritative and irresistible
witness to his own doctrine that where quod ubique, or
universitas, is uncertain, we must turn to quod semper, or
antiquitas. Nothing could be more to his purpose than the
pope's: "Desinat incessere novitas vetustatem" The oecumenical
Council of Ephesus had been held in the same year that Celestine
wrote. Its Acts were before St. Vincent, and it is clear that he
looked upon both pope and council as decisive authorities. It
was necessary to establish this, before turning to his famous
canon, quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus otherwise
universitas, antiquitas, consensio. It was not a new criterion,
else it would have committed suicide by its very expression. But
never had the doctrine been so admirably phrased, so limpidly
explained, so adequately exemplified. Even the law of the
evolution of dogma is defined by Vincent in language which can
hardly be surpassed for exactness and vigour. St. Vincent's
triple test is wholly misunderstood if it is taken to be the
ordinary rule of faith. Like all Catholics he took the ordinary
rule to be the living magisterium of the Church, and he assumes
that the formal decision in cases of doubt lies with the
Apostolic See, or with a general council. But cases of doubt
arise when no such decision is forthcoming. Then it is that the
three tests are to be applied, not simultaneously, but, if
necessary, in succession.
When an error is found in one corner of the Church, then the
first test, universitas, quod ubique, is an unanswerable
refutation, nor is there any need to examine further (iii, 7,
8). But if an error attacks the whole Church, then antiquitas,
quod semper is to be appealed to, that is, a consensus existing
before the novelty arose. Still, in the previous period one or
two teachers, even men of great fame, may have erred. Then we
betake ourselves to quod ab omnibus, consensio, to the many
against the few (if possible to a general council; if not, to an
examination of writings). Those few are a trial of faith "ut
tentet vos Dominus Deus vester" (Deut., xiii, 1 sqq.). So
Tertullian was a magna tentatio; so was Origen -- indeed the
greatest temptation of all. We must know that whenever what is
new or unheard before is introduced by one man beyond or against
all the saints, it pertains not to religion but to temptation
(xx, 49). Who are the "Saints" to whom we appeal? The reply is a
definition of "Fathers of the Church" given with all St.
Vincent's inimitable accuracy: "Inter se majorem consulat
interrogetque sententias, eorum dumtaxat qui, diversis licet
temporibus et locis, in unius tamen ecclesiae Catholicae
communione et fide permanentes, magistri probabiles exstiterunt;
et quicquid non unus aut duo tantum, sed omnes pariter uno
eodemque consensu aperte, frequenter, perseveranter tenuisse,
scripsisse, docuisse cognoverit, id sibi quoque intelligat
absque ulla dubitatione credendum" (iii, 8). This unambiguous
sentence defines for us what is the right way of appealing to
the Fathers, and the italicized words perfectly explain what is
a "Father": "Those alone who, though in diverse times and
places, yet persevering in time communion and faith of the one
Catholic Church, have been approved teachers."
The same result is obtained by modern theologians, in their
definitions; e.g. Fessler thus defines what constitutes a
"Father":
1. orthodox doctrine and learning;
2. holiness of life;
3. (at the present day) a certain antiquity.
The criteria by which we judge whether a writer is a "Father" or
not are:
1. citation by a general council, or
2. in public Acts of popes addressed to the Church or concerning
Faith;
3. encomium in the Roman Martyrology as "sanctitate et doctrina
insignis";
4. public reading in Churches in early centuries;
5. citations, with praise, as an authority as to the Faith by
some of the more celebrated Fathers.
Early authors, though belonging to the Church, who fail to reach
this standard are simply ecclesiastical writers ("Patrologia",
ed. Jungmann, ch. i, #11). On the other hand, where the appeal
is not to the authority of the writer, but his testimony is
merely required to the belief of his time, one writer is as good
as another, and if a Father is cited for this purpose, it is not
as a Father that he is cited, but merely as a witness to facts
well known to him. For the history of dogma, therefore, the
works of ecclesiastical writers who are not only not approved,
but even heretical, are often just as valuable as those of the
Fathers. On the other hand, the witness of one Father is
occasionally of great weight for doctrine when taken singly, if
he is teaching a subject on which he is recognized by the Church
as an especial authority, e.g., St. Athanasius on the Divinity
of the Son, St. Augustine on the Holy Trinity, etc. There are a
few cases in which a general council has given approbation to
the work of a Father, the most important being the two letters
of St. Cyril of Alexandria which were read at the Council of
Ephesus. But the authority of single Fathers considered in
itself, says Franzelin (De traditione, thesis xv), "is not
infallible or peremptory; though piety and sound reason agree
that the theological opinions of such individuals should not be
treated lightly, and should not without great caution be
interpreted in a sense which clashes with the common doctrine of
other Fathers." The reason is plain enough; they were holy men,
who are not to be presumed to have intended to stray from the
doctrine of the Church, and their doubtful utterances are
therefore to be taken in the best sense of which they are
capable. If they cannot be explained in an orthodox sense, we
have to admit that not the greatest is immune from ignorance or
accidental error or obscurity. But on the use of the Fathers in
theological questions, the article Tradition and the ordinary
dogmatic treatises on that subject must be consulted, as it is
proper here only to deal with the historical development of
their use. The subject was never treated as a part of dogmatic
theology until the rise of what is now commonly called
"Theologia fundamentalis", in the sixteenth century, the
founders of which are Melchior Canus and Bellarmine. The former
has a discussion of the use of the Fathers in deciding questions
of faith (De locis theologicis, vii). The Protestant Reformers
attacked the authority of the Fathers. The most famous of these
opponents is Dalbeus (Jean Daille, 1594-1670, "Traite de
l'emploi des saints Peres", 1632; in Latin "De usu Patrum",
1656). But their objections are long since forgotten. Having
traced the development of the use of the Fathers up to the
period of its frequent employment, and of its formal statement
by St. Vincent of Lerins, it will be well to give a glance at
the continuation of the practice. We saw that, in 431, it was
possible for St. Vincent (in a book which has been most
unreasonably taken to be a mere polemic against St. Augustine --
a notion which is amply refuted by the use made in it of St.
Celestine's letter) to define the meaning and method of
patristic appeals. From that time onward they are very common.
in the Council of Ephesus, 431, as St. Vincent points out, St.
Cyril presented a series of quotations from the Fathers, ton
hagiotaton kai hosiotaton pateron kai episkopon diaphoron
marturon, which were read on the motion of Flavian, Bishop of
Philippi. They were from Peter I of Alexandria, Martyr,
Athanasius, Popes Julius and Felix (forgeries), Theophilus,
Cyprian, Ambrose, Gregory Nazianzen, Basil, Gregory of Nyssa,
Atticus, Amphilochius. On the other hand Eutyches, when tried at
Constantinople by St. Flavian, in 449, refused to accept either
Fathers or councils as authorities, confining himself to Holy
Scripture, a position which horrified his judges (see Eutyches).
In the following year St. Leo sent his legates, Abundius and
Asterius. to Constantinople with a list of testimonies from
Hilary, Athanasius, Ambrose, Augustine, Chrysostom, Theophilus,
Gregory Nazianzen, Basil, Cyril of Alexandria. They were signed
in that city, but were not produced at the Council of Chalcedon
in the following year. Thenceforward the custom is fixed, and it
is unnecessary to give examples. However, that of the sixth
council in 680 is important: Pope St. Agatho sent a long series
of extracts from Rome, and the leader of the Monothelites,
Macarius of Antioch, presented another. Both sets were carefully
verified from the library of the Patriarchate of Constantinople,
and sealed. It should be noted that it was never in such cases
thought necessary to trace a doctrine back to the earliest
times; St. Vincent demanded the proof of the Church's belief
before a doubt arose -- this is his notion of antiquitas; and in
conformity with this view, the Fathers quoted by councils and
popes and Fathers are for the most part recent (Petavius, De
Incarn., XIV, 15, 2-5).
In the last years of the fifth century a famous document,
attributed to Popes Gelasius and Hormisdas, adds to decrees of
St. Damasus of 382 a list of books which are approved, and
another of those disapproved. In its present form the list of
approved Fathers comprises Cyprian, Gregory Nazianzen, Basil,
Athanasius, Chrysostom, Theophilus, Hilary, Cyril of Alexandria
(wanting in one MS.), Ambrose, Augustine, Jerome, Prosper, Leo
("every iota" of the tome to Flavian is to be accepted under
anathema), and "also the treatises of all orthodox Fathers, who
deviated in nothing from the fellowship of the holy Roman
Church, and were not separated from her faith and preaching, but
were participators through the grace of God until the end of
their life in her communion; also the decretal letters, which
most blessed popes have given at various times when consulted by
various Fathers, are to be received with veneration". Orosius,
Sedulius, and Juvencus are praised. Rufinus and Origen are
rejected. Eusebius's "History" and "Chronicle" are not to be
condemned altogether, though in another part of the list they
appear as "apocrypha" with Tertullian, Lactantius, Africanus,
Commodian, Clement of Alexandria, Arnobius, Cassian, Victorinus
of Pettau, Faustus, and the works of heretics, and forged
Scriptural documents. The later Fathers constantly used the
writings of the earlier. For instance, St. Caesarius of Arles
drew freely on St. Augustine's sermons, and embodied them in
collections of his own; St. Gregory the Great has largely
founded himself on St. Augustine; St. Isidore rests upon all his
predecessors; St. John Damascene's great work is a synthesis of
patristic theology. St. Bede's sermons are a cento from the
greater Fathers. Eugippius made a selection from St. Augustine's
writings, which had an immense vogue. Cassiodorus made a
collection of select commentaries by various writers on all the
books of Holy Scripture. St. Benedict especially recommended
patristic study, and his sons have observed his advice: "Ad
perfectionem conversationis qui festinat, sunt doctrinae
sanctorum Patrum, quarum observatio perducat hominem ad
celsitudinem perfectionis . . . quis liber sanctorum
catholicorum Patrum hoc non resonat, ut recto cursu perveniamus
ad creatorem nostrum?" (Sanet Regula, lxxiii). Florilegia and
catenae became common from the fifth century onwards. They are
mostly anonymous, but those in the East which go under the name
OEcumenius are well known. Most famous of all throughout the
Middle Ages was the "Glossa ordinaria" attributed to Walafrid
Strabo. The "Catena aurea" of St. Thomas Aquinas is still in
use. (See Catenae, and the valuable matter collected by Turner
in Hastings, Dict. of the Bible, V, 521.)
St. Augustine was early recognized as the first of the Western
Fathers, with St. Ambrose and St. Jerome by his side. St.
Gregory the Great was added, and these four became "the Latin
Doctors". St. Leo, in some ways the greatest of theologians, was
excluded, both on account of the paucity of his writings, and by
the fact that his letters had a far higher authority as papal
utterances. In the East St. John Chrysostom has always been the
most popular, as he is the most voluminous, of the Fathers. With
the great St. Basil, the father of monachism, and St. Gregory
Nazianzen, famous for the purity of his faith, he made up the
triumvirate called "the three hierarchs", familiar up to the
present day in Eastern art. St. Athanasius was added to these by
the Westerns, so that four might answer to four. (See Doctors of
the Church.) It will be observed that many of the writers
rejected in the Gelasian list lived and died in Catholic
communion, but incorrectness in some part of their writings,
e.g. the Semipelagian error attributed to Cassian and Faustus,
the chiliasm of the conclusion of Victoninus's commentary on the
Apocalypse (St. Jerome issued an expurgated edition, the only
one in print as yet), the unsoundness of the lost "Hypotyposes"
of Clement, and so forth, prevented such writers from being
spoken of, as Hilary was by Jerome, "inoffenso pede
percurritur". As all the more important doctrines of the Church
(except that of the Canon and the inspiration of Scripture) may
be proved, or at least illustrated, from Scripture, the widest
office of tradition is the interpretation of Scripture, and the
authority of the Fathers is here of very great importance.
Nevertheless it is only then necessarily to be followed when all
are of one mind: "Nemo . . . contra unanimum consensum Patrum
ipsam Scripturam sacram interpretari audeat", says the Council
of Trent; and the Creed of Pius IV has similarly: ". . . nec eam
unquam nisi juxta unanimum consensum Patrum accipiam et
interpretabor". The Vatican Council echoes Trent: "nemini licere
. . . contra unanimum sensum Patrum ipsam Scripturam sacram
interpretari."
A consensus of the Fathers is not, of course, to be expected in
very small matters: "Quae tamen antiqua sanctorum patrum
consensio non in omnibus divinae legis quaestiunculis, sed solum
certe praecipue in fidei regula magno nobis studio et
investiganda est et sequenda" (Vincent, xxviii, 72). This is not
the method, adds St. Vincent, against widespread and inveterate
heresies, but rather against novelties, to be applied directly
they appear. A better instance could hardly be given than the
way in which Adoptionism was met by the Council of Frankfort in
794, nor could the principle be better expressed than by the
Fathers of the Council: "Tenete vos intra terminos Patrum, et
nolite novas versare quaestiunculas; ad nihilum enim valent nisi
ad subversionem audientium. Sufficit enim vobis sanctorum Patrum
vestigia sequi, et illorum dicta firma tenere fide. Illi enim in
Domino nostri exstiterunt doctores in fide et ductores ad vitam;
quorum et sapientia Spiritu Dei plena libris legitur inscripta,
et vita meritorum miraculis clara et sanctissima; quorum animae
apud Deum Dei Filium, D.N.J.C. pro magno pietatis labore regnant
in caelis. Hos ergo tota animi virtute, toto caritatis affectu
sequimini, beatissimi fratres, ut horum inconcussa firmitate
doctrinis adhaerentes, consortium aeternae beatitudinis . . .
cum illis habere mereamini in caelis" ("Synodica ad Episc." in
Mansi, XIII, 897-8). And an excellent act of faith in the
tradition of the Church is that of Charlemagne (ibid., 902) made
on the same occasion: "Apostolicae sedi et antiquis ab initio
nascentis ecclesiae et catholicis traditionibus tota mentis
intentione, tota cordis alacritate, me conjungo. Quicquid in
illorum legitur libris, qui divino Spiritu afflati, toti orbi a
Deo Christo dati sunt doctores, indubitanter teneo; hoc ad
salutem animae meae sufficere credens, quod sacratissimae
evangelicae veritatis pandit historia, quod apostolica in suis
epistolis confirmat auctoritas, quod eximii Sacrae Scripturae
tractatores et praecipui Christianae fidei doctores ad perpetuam
posteris scriptum reliquerunt memoriam."
II. CLASSIFICATION OF PATRISTIC WRITINGS
In order to get a good view of the patristic period, the Fathers
may be divided in various ways. One favourite method is by
periods; the Ante-Nicene Fathers till 325; the Great Fathers of
the fourth century and half the fifth (325-451); and the later
Fathers. A more obvious division is into Easterns and Westerns,
and the Easterns will comprise writers in Greek, Syriac,
Armenian, and Coptic. A convenient division into smaller groups
will be by periods, nationalities and character of writings; for
in the East and West there were many races, and some of the
ecclesiastical writers are apologists, some preachers, some
historians, some commentators, and so forth.
A. After (1) the Apostolic Fathers come in the second century
(2) the Greek apologists, followed by (3) the Western apologists
somewhat later, (4) the Gnostic and Marcionite heretics with
their apocryphal Scriptures, and (5) the Catholic replies to
them.
B. The third century gives us (1) the Alexandrian writers of the
catechetical school, (2) the writers of Asia Minor and (3)
Palestine, and the first Western writers, (4) at Rome,
Hippolytus (in Greek), and Novatian, (5) the great African
writers, and a few others.
C. The fourth century opens with (1) the apologetic and the
historical works of Eusebius of Caesarea, with whom we may class
St. Cyril of Jerusalem and St. Epiphanius, (2) the Alexandrian
writers Athanasius, Didymus, and others, (3) the Cappadocians,
(4) the Antiochenes, (5) the Syriac writers. In the West we have
(6) the opponents of Arianism, (7) the Italians, including
Jerome, (8) the Africans, and (9) the Spanish and Gallic
writers.
D. The fifth century gives us (1) the Nestorian controversy, (2)
the Eutychian controversy, including the Western St. Leo; (3)
the historians. In the West (4) the school of Lerins, (5) the
letters of the popes.
E. The sixth century and the seventh give us less important
names and they must be grouped in a more mechanical way.
A. (1) If we now take these groups in detail we find the letters
of the chief Apostolic Fathers, St. Clement, St. Ignatius, and
St. Polycarp, venerable not merely for their antiquity, but for
a certain simplicity and nobility of thought and style which is
very moving to the reader. Their quotations from the New
Testament are quite free. They offer most important information
to the historian, though in somewhat homoeopathic quantities. To
these we add the Didache, probably the earliest of all; the
curious allegorizing anti-Jewish epistle which goes under the
name of Barnabas; the Shepherd of Hermas, a rather dull series
of visions chiefly connected with penance and pardon, composed
by the brother of Pope Pius I, and long appended to the New
Testament as of almost canonical importance. The works of
Papias, the disciple of St. John and Aristion, are lost, all but
a few precious fragments.
(2) The apologists are most of them philosophic in their
treatment of Christianity. Some of their works were presented to
emperors in order to disarm persecutions. We must not always
accept the view given to outsiders by the apologists, as
representing the whole of the Christianity they knew and
practised. The apologies of Quadratus to Hadrian, of Aristo of
Pella to the Jews, of Miltiades, of Apollinaris of Hierapolis,
and of Melito of Sardis are lost to us. But we still possess
several of greater importance. That of Aristides of Athens was
presented to Antoninus Pius, and deals principally with the
knowledge of the true God. The fine apology of St. Justin with
its appendix is above all interesting for its description of the
liturgy at Rome c. 150. his arguments against the Jews are found
in the well-composed "Dialogue with Trypho", where he speaks of
the Apostolic authorship of the Apocalypse in a manner which is
of first-rate importance in the mouth of a man who was converted
at Ephesus some time before the year 132. The "Apology" of
Justin's Syrian disciple Tatian is a less conciliatory work, and
its author fell into heresy. Athenagoras, an Athenian (c. 177),
addressed to Marcus Aurelius and Commodus an eloquent refutation
of the absurd calumnies against Christians. Theophilus, Bishop
of Antioch, about the same date, wrote three books of apology
addressed to a certain Autolycus.
(3) All these works are of considerable literary ability. This
is not the case with the great Latin apology which closely
follows them in date, the "Apologeticus" of Tertullian, which is
in the uncouth and untranslatable language affected by its
author. Nevertheless it is a work of extraordinary genius, in
interest and value far above all the rest, and for energy and
boldness it is incomparable. His fierce "Ad Scapulam" is a
warning addressed to a persecuting proconsul. "Adversus Judaeos"
is a title which explains itself. The other Latin apologists are
later. The "Octavios" of Minucius Felix is as polished and
gentle as Tertullian is rough. Its date is uncertain. If the
"Apologeticus "was well calculated to infuse courage into the
persecuted Christian, the "Octavius" was more likely to impress
the inquiring pagan, if so be that more flies are caught with
honey than with vinegar. With these works we may mention the
much later Lactantius, the most perfect of all in literary form
("Divinae Institutiones", c. 305-10, and "De Mortibus
persecutorum", c. 314). Greek apologies probably later than the
second century are the "Irrisiones" of Hermias, and the very
beautiful "Epistle" to Diognetus.
(4) The heretical writings of the second century are mostly
lost. The Gnostics had schools and philosophized; their writers
were numerous. Some curious works have come down to us in
Coptic. The letter of Ptolemeus to Flora in Epiphanius is almost
the only Greek fragment of real importance. Marcion founded not
a school but a Church, and his New Testament, consisting of St.
Luke and St. Paul, is preserved to some extent in the works
written against him by Tertullian and Epiphanius. Of the
writings of Greek Montanists and of other early heretics, almost
nothing remains. The Gnostics composed a quantity of apocryphal
Gospels amid Acts of individual Apostles, large portions of
which are preserved, mostly in fragments, in Latin revisions, or
in Syriac, Coptic, Arabic, or Slavonic versions. To these are to
be added such well-known forgeries as the letters of Paul to
Seneca, and the Apocalypse of Peter, of which a fragment was
recently found in the Fayum.
(5) Replies to the attacks of heretics form, next to the
apologetic against heathen persecutors on the one hand and Jews
on the other, the characteristic Catholic literature of the
second century. The "Syntagma" of St. Justin against all
heresies is lost. Earlier yet, St. Papias (already mentioned)
had directed his efforts to the refutation of the rising errors,
and the same preoccupation is seen in St. Ignatius and St.
Polycarp. Hegesippus, a converted Jew of Palestine, journeyed to
Corinth and Rome, where he stayed from the episcopate of
Anicetus till that of Eleutherius (c. 160-180), with the
intention of refuting the novelties of the Gnostics and
Marcionites by an appeal to tradition. His work is lost. But the
great work of St. Irenaeus (c. 180) against heresies is founded
on Papias, Hegesippus, and Justin, and gives from careful
investigation an account of many Gnostic systems, together with
their refutation. His appeal is less to Scripture than to the
tradition which the whole Catholic Church has received and
handed down from the Apostles, through the ministry of
successive bishops, and particularly to the tradition of the
Roman Church founded by Peter and Paul.
By the side of Irenaeus must be put the Latin Tertullian, whose
book "Of the Prescriptions Against Heretics" is not only a
masterpiece of argument, but is almost as effective against
modern heresies as against those of the early Church. It is a
witness of extraordinary importance to the principles of
unvarying tradition which the Catholic Church has always
professed, and to the primitive belief that Holy Scripture must
be interpreted by the Church and not by private industry. He
uses Irenaeus in this work, and his polemical books against the
Valentinians and the Marcionites borrow freely from that saint.
He is the less persuasive of the two, because he is too abrupt,
too clever, too anxious for the slightest controversial
advantage, without thought of the easy replies that might be
made. He sometimes prefers wit or hard hitting to solid
argument. At this period controversies were beginning within the
Church, the most important being the question whether Easter
could be celebrated on a weekday. Another burning question at
Rome, at the turn of the century, was the doubt whether the
prophesying of the Montanists could be approved, and yet
another, in the first years of the third century, was the
controversy with a group of opponents of Montanism (so it
seems), who denied the authenticity of the writings of St. John,
an error then quite new.
B. (1) The Church of Alexandria already in the second century
showed the note of learning, together with a habit borrowed from
the Alexandrian Jews, especially Philo, of an allegorizing
interpretation of Scripture. The latter characteristic is
already found in the "Epistle of Barnabas", which may be of
Alexandrian origin. Pantamus was the first to make the
Catechetical school of the city famous. No writings of his are
extant, but his pupil Clement, who taught in the school with
Pantamus, c. 180, and as its head, c. 180-202 (died c. 214), has
left a considerable amount of rather lengthy disquisitions
dealing with mythology, mystical theology, education, social
observances, and all other things in heaven and on earth. He was
followed by the great Origen, whose fame spread far and wide
even among the heathen. The remains of his works, though they
fill several volumes, are to a great extent only in free Latin
translations, and bear but a small ratio to the vast amount that
has perished. The Alexandrians held as firmly as any Catholics
to tradition as the rule of faith, at least in theory, but
beyond tradition they allowed themselves to speculate, so that
the "Hypotyposes" of Clement have been almost entirely lost on
account of the errors which found a place in them, and Origen's
works fell under the ban of the Church, though their author
lived the life of a saint, and died, shortly after the Decian
persecution, of the sufferings he had undergone in it.
The disciples of Origen were many and eminent. The library
founded by one of them, St. Alexander of Jerusalem, was precious
later on to Eusebius. The most celebrated of the school were St.
Dionysius "the Great" of Alexandria and St. Gregory of
Neocaesarea in Pontus, known as the Wonder-Worker, who, like St.
Nonnosus in the West, was said to have moved a mountain for
short distance by his prayers. Of the writings of these two
saints not very much is extant.
(2) Montanism and the paschal question brought Asia Minor down
from the leading position it held in the second century into a
very inferior rank in the third. Besides St. Gregory, St.
Methodius at the end of that century was a polished writer and
an opponent of Origenism -- his name is consequently passed over
without mention by the Origenist historian Eusebius. We have his
"Banquet" in Greek, and some smaller works in Old Slavonic.
(3) Antioch was the head see over the "Orient" including Syria
and Mesopotamia as well as Palestine and Phoenicia, but at no
time did this form a compact patriarchate like that of
Alexandria. We must group here writers who have no connection
with one another in matter or style. Julius Africanus lived at
Emmaus and composed a chronography, out of which the episcopal
lists of Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch, and a great deal of
other matter, have been preserved for us in St. Jerome's version
of the Chronicle of Eusebius, and in Byzantine chronographers.
Two letters of his are of interest, but the fragments of his
"Kestoi" or "Girdles" are of no ecclesiastical value; they
contain much curious matter and much that is objectionable. In
the second half of the third century, perhaps towards the end of
it, a great school was established at Antioch by Lucian, who was
martyred at Nicomedia in 312. He is said to have been
excommunicated under three bishops, but if this is true he had
been long restored at the time of his martyrdom. It is quite
uncertain whether he shared the errors of Paul of Samosata
(Bishop of Antioch, deposed for heresy in 268-9). At all events
he was -- however unintentionally -- the father of Arianism, and
his pupils were the leaders of that heresy: Eusebius of
Nicomedia, Arius himself, with Menophantus of Ephesus,
Athanasius of Anazarbus, and the only two bishops who refused to
sign the new creed at the Council of Nicaea, Theognis of Nicaea
and Maris of Chalcedon, besides the scandalous bishop Leontius
of Antioch and the Sophist Asterius. At Caesarea, an Origenist
centre, flourished under another martyr, St. Pamphilus, who with
his friend Eusebius, a certain Ammonius, and others, collected
the works of Origen in a long-famous library, corrected Origen's
"Hexapla", and did much editing of the text both of the Old and
the New Testaments.
(4) We hear of no writings at Rome except in Greek, until the
mention of some small works in Latin, by Pope St. Victor, which
still existed in Jerome's day. Hippolytus, a Roman priest, wrote
from c. 200 to 235, and always in Greek, though at Carthage
Tertullian had been writing before this in Latin. If Hippolytus
is the author of the "Philosophumena" he was an antipope, and
full of unreasoning enmity to his rival St. Callistus; his
theology makes the Word proceed from God by His Will, distinct
from Him in substance, and becoming Son by becoming man. There
is nothing Roman in the theology of this work; it rather
connects itself with the Greek apologists. A great part of a
large commentary on Daniel and a work against Noetus are the
only other important remains of this writer, who was soon
forgotten in the West, though fragments of his works turn up in
all the Eastern languages. Parts of his chronography, perhaps
his last work, have survived. Another Roman antipope, Novatian,
wrote in ponderous and studied prose with metrical endings. Some
of his works have come down to us under the name of St. Cyprian.
Like Hippolytus, he made his rigorist views the pretext for his
schism. Unlike Hippolytus, he is quite orthodox in his principal
work, "De Trinitate".
(5) The apologetic works of Tertullian have been mentioned. The
earlier were written by him when a priest of the Church of
Carthage, but about the year 200 he was led to believe in the
Montanist prophets of Phrygia, and he headed a Montanist schism
at Carthage. Many of his treatises are written to defend his
position and his rigorist doctrines, and he does so with
considerable violence and with the clever and hasty
argumentation which is natural to him. The placid flow of St.
Cyprian's eloquence (Bishop of Carthage, 249-58) is a great
contrast to that of his "master". The short treatises and large
correspondence of this saint are all concerned with local
questions and needs, and he eschews all speculative theology.
From this we gain the more light on the state of the Church, on
its government, and on a number of interesting ecclesiastical
and social matters. In all the patristic period there is
nothing, with the exception of Eusebius's history, which tells
us so much about the early Church as the small volume which
contains St. Cyprian's works. At the end of the century
Arnobius, like Cyprian a convert in middle age, and like other
Africans, Tertullian, Cyprian, Lactantius, and Augustine, a
former rhetorician, composed a dull apology. Lactantius carries
us into the fourth century. He was an elegant and eloquent
writer, but like Arnobius was not a well-instructed Christian.
C. (1) The fourth century is the great age of the Fathers. It
was twelve years old when Constantine published his edict of
toleration, and a new era for the Christian religion began. It
is ushered in by Eusebius of Caesarea, with his great apologetic
works "Praeparatio Evangelica"'and "Demonstratio Evangelica",
which show the transcendent merit of Christianity, and his still
greater historical works, the "Chronicle" (the Greek original is
lost) and the "History", which has gathered up the fragments of
the age of persecutions, and has preserved to us more than half
of all we know about the heroic ages of the Faith. In theology
Eusebius was a follower of Origen, but he rejected the eternity
of Creation and of the Logos, so that he was able to regard the
Arians with considerable cordiality. The original form of the
pseudo-Clementine romance, with its long and tiresome dialogues,
seems to be a work of the very beginning of the century against
the new developments of heathenism, and it was written either on
the Phoenician coast or not far inland in the Syrian
neighbourhood. Replies to the greatest of the pagan attacks,
that of Porphyry, become more frequent after the pagan revival
under Julian (361-3), and they occupied the labours of many
celebrated writers. St. Cyril of Jerusalem has left us a
complete series of instructions to catechumens and the baptized,
thus supplying us with an exact knowledge of the religious
teaching imparted to the people in an important Church of the
East in the middle of the fourth century. A Palestinian of the
second half of the century, St. Epiphanius, became Bishop of
Salamis in Cyprus, and wrote a learned history of all the
heresies. He is unfortunately inaccurate, and has further made
great difficulties for us by not naming his authorities. He was
a friend of St. Jerome, and an uncompromising opponent of
Origenism.
(2) The Alexandrian priest Arius was not a product of the
catechetical school of that city, but of the Lucianic school of
Antioch. The Alexandrian tendency was quite opposite to the
Antiochene, and the Alexandrian bishop, Alexander, condemned
Arius in letters still extant, in which we gather the tradition
of the Alexandrian Church. There is no trace in them of
Origenism, the head-quarters of which had long been at Caesarea
in Palestine, in the succession Theoctistus, Pamphilus,
Eusebius. The tradition of Alexandria was rather that which
Dionysius the Great had received from Pope Dionysius. Three
years after the Nicene Council (325), St. Athanasius began his
long episcopate of forty-five years. His writings are not very
voluminous, being either controversial theology or apologetic
memoirs of his own troubles, but their theological and
historical value is enormous, on account of the leading part
taken by this truly great man in the fifty years of fight with
Arianism. The head of the catechetical school during this
half-century was Didymus the Blind, an Athanasian in his
doctrine of the Son, and rather clearer even than his patriarch
in his doctrine of the Trinity, but in many other points
carrying on the Origenistic tradition. Here may be also
mentioned by the way a rather later writer, Synesius of Cyrene,
a man of philosophical and literary habits, who showed energy
and sincere piety as a bishop, in spite of the rather pagan
character of his culture. His letters are of great interest.
(3) The second half of the century is illustrated by an
illustrious triad in Cappadocia, St. Basil, his friend St.
Gregory Nazianzen, and his brother St. Gregory of Nyssa. They
were the main workers in the return of the East to orthodoxy.
Their doctrine of the Trinity is an advance even upon that of
Didymus, and is very near indeed to the Roman doctrine which was
later embodied in the Athanasian creed. But it had taken a long
while for the East to assimilate the entire meaning of the
orthodox view. St. Basil showed great patience with those who
had advanced less far on the right road than himself, and he
even tempered his language so as to conciliate them. For fame of
sanctity scarcely any of the Fathers, save St. Gregory the
Wonder-Worker, or St. Augustine, has ever equalled him. He
practised extraordinary asceticism, and his family were all
saints. He composed a rule for monks which has remained
practically the only one in the East. St. Gregory had far less
character, but equal abilities and learning, with greater
eloquence. The love of Origen which persuaded the friends in
their youth to publish a book of extracts from his writings had
little influence on their later theology; that of St. Gregory in
particular is renowned for its accuracy or even inerrancy. St.
Gregory of Nyssa is, on the other hand, full of Origenism. The
classical culture and literary form of the Cappadocians, united
to sanctity and orthodoxy, makes them a unique group in the
history of the Church.
(4) The Antiochene school of the fourth century seemed given
over to Arianism, until the time when the great Alexandrians,
Athanasius and Didymus, were dying, when it was just reviving
not merely into orthodoxy, but into an efflorescence by which
the recent glory of Alexandria and even of Cappadocia was to be
surpassed. Diodorus, a monk at Antioch and then Bishop of
Tarsus, was a noble supporter of Nicene doctrine and a great
writer, though the larger part of his works has perished. His
friend Theodore of Mopsuestia was a learned and judicious
commentator in the literal Antiochene style, but unfortunately
his opposition to the heresy of Apollinarius of Laodicea carried
him into the opposite extreme of Nestorianism -- indeed the
pupil Nestorius scarcely went so far as the master Theodore. But
then Nestorius resisted the judgment of the Church, whereas
Theodore died in Catholic communion, and was the friend of
saints, including that crowning glory of the Antiochene school,
St. John Chrysostom, whose greatest sermons were preached at
Antioch, before he became Bishop of Constantinople. Chrysostom
is of course the chief of the Greek Fathers, the first of all
commentators, and the first of all orators whether in East or
West. He was for a time a hermit, and remained ascetic in his
life; he was also a fervent social reformer. His grandeur of
character makes him worthy of a place beside St. Basil and St.
Athanasius.
As Basil and Gregory were formed to oratory by the Christian
Prohaeresius, so was Chrysostom by the heathen orator Libanius.
In the classical Gregory we may sometimes find the rhetorician;
in Chrysostom never; his amazing natural talent prevents his
needing the assistance of art, and though training had preceded,
it has been lost in the flow of energetic thought and the
torrent of words. He is not afraid of repeating himself and of
neglecting the rules, for he never wishes to be admired, but
only to instruct or to persuade. But even so great a man has his
limitations. He has no speculative interest in philosophy or
theology, though he is learned enough to be absolutely orthodox.
He is a holy man and a practical man, so that his thoughts are
full of piety and beauty and wisdom; but he is not a thinker.
None of the Fathers has been more imitated or more read; but
there is little in his writings which can be said to have
moulded his own or future times, and he cannot come for an
instant into competition with Origen or Augustine for the first
place among ecclesiastical writers.
(5) Syria in the fourth century produced one great writer, St.
Ephraem, deacon of Edessa (306-73). Most of his writings are
poetry; his commentaries are in prose, but the remains of these
are scantier. His homilies and hymns are all in metre, and are
of very great beauty. Such tender and loving piety is hardly
found elsewhere in the Fathers. The twenty-three homilies of
Aphraates (326-7), a Mesopotamian bishop, are of great interest.
(6) St. Hilary of Poitiers is the most famous of the earlier
opponents of Arianism in the West. He wrote commentaries and
polemical works, including the great treatise "De Trinitate" and
a lost historical work. His style is affectedly involved and
obscure, but he is nevertheless a theologian of considerable
merit. The very name of his treatise on the Trinity shows that
he approached the dogma from the Western point of view of a
Trinity in Unity, but he has largely employed the works of
Origen, Athanasius, and other Easterns. His exegesis is of the
allegorical type. Until his day, the only great Latin Father was
St. Cyprian, and Hilary had no rival in his own generation.
Lucifer, Bishop of Calaris in Sardinia, was a very rude
controversialist, who wrote in a popular and almost uneducated
manner. The Spaniard Gregory of Illiberis, in Southern Spain, is
only now beginning to receive his due, since Dom A. Wilmart
restored to him in 1908 the important so-called "Tractatus
Origenis de libris SS. Scripturae", which he and Batiffol had
published in 1900, as genuine works of Origen translated by
Victorinus of Pettau. The commentaries and anti-Arian works of
the converted rhetorician, Marius Victorinus, were not
successful. St. Eusebius of Vercellae has left us only a few
letters. The date of the short discourses of Zeno of Verona is
uncertain. The fine letter of Pope Julius I to the Arians and a
few letters of Liberius and Damasus are of great interest.
The greatest of the opponents of Arianism in the West is St.
Ambrose (d. 397). His sanctity and his great actions make him
one of the most imposing figures in the patristic period.
Unfortunately the style of his writings is often unpleasant,
being affected and intricate, without being correct or artistic.
His exegesis is not merely of the most extreme allegorical kind,
but so fanciful as to be sometimes positively absurd. And yet,
when off his guard, he speaks with genuine and touching
eloquence; he produces apophthegms of admirable brevity, and
without being a deep theologian, he shows a wonderful profundity
of thought on ascetical, moral, and devotional matters. Just as
his character demands our enthusiastic admiration, so his
writings gain our affectionate respect, in spite of their very
irritating defects. It is easy to see that he is very well read
in the classics and in Christian writers of East and West, but
his best thoughts are all his own.
(7) At Rome an original, odd, and learned writer composed a
commentary on St. Paul's Epistles and a series of questions on
the Old and New Testaments. He is usually spoken of as
Ambrosiaster, and may perhaps be a converted Jew named Isaac,
who later apostatized. St. Damasus wrote verses which are poor
poetry but interesting where they give us information about the
martyrs and the catacombs. His secretary for a time was St.
Jerome, a Pannonian by birth, a Roman by baptism. This learned
Father, "Doctor maximus in Sacris Scripturis", is very well
known to us, for almost all that he wrote is a revelation of
himself. He tells the reader of his inclinations and his
antipathies, his enthusiasms and his irritations, his
friendships and his enmities. If he is often out of temper, he
is most human, most affectionate, most ascetic, most devoted to
orthodoxy, and in many ways a very lovable character; for if he
is quick to take offence, he is easily appeased, he is laborious
beyond ordinary endurance, and it is against heresy that his
anger is usually kindled. He lived all the latter part of his
life in a retreat at Bethlehem, surrounded by loving disciples,
whose untiring devotion shows that the saint was by no means
such a rough diamond, one might say such an ogre, as he is often
represented. He had no taste for philosophy, and seldom gave
himself time to think, but he read and wrote ceaselessly. His
many commentaries are brief and to the point, full of
information, and the product of wide reading. His greatest work
was the translation of the Old Testament from the Hebrew into
Latin. He carried on the textual labours of Origen, Pamphilus,
and Eusebius, and his revision of the Latin Gospels shows the
use of admirably pure Greek MSS., though he seems to have
expended less pains on the rest of the New Testament. He
attacked heretics with much of the cleverness, all the vivacity,
and much more than the eloquence and effectiveness of
Tertullian. He used the like weapons against any who attacked
him, and especially against his friend Rufinus during their
passing period of hostility.
If he is only "perhaps" the most learned of the Fathers, he is
beyond doubt the greatest of prose writers among them all. We
cannot compare his energy and wit with the originality and
polish of Cicero, or with the delicate perfection of Plato, but
neither can they or any other writer be compared with Jerome in
his own sphere. He does not attempt flights of imagination,
musical intonation, word-painting; he has no flow of honeyed
language like Cyprian, no torrent of phrases like Chrysostom; he
is a writer, not an orator, and a learned and classical writer.
But such letters as his, for astonishing force and liveliness,
for point, and wit, and terse expression, were never written
before or since. There is no sense of effort, and though we feel
that the language must have been studied, we are rarely tempted
to call it studied language, for Jerome knows the strange secret
of polishing his steel weapons while they are still at a white
heat, and of hurling them before they cool. He was a dangerous
adversary, and had few scruples in taking every possible
advantage. He has the unfortunate defect of his extraordinary
swiftness, that he is extremely inaccurate, and his historical
statements need careful control. His biographies of the hermits,
his words about monastic life, virginity, Roman faith, our
Blessed Lady, relics of saints, have exercised great influence.
It has only been known of late years that Jerome was a preacher;
the little extempore discourses published by Dom Mona are full
of his irrepressible personality and his careless learning.
(8) Africa was a stranger to the Arian struggle, being occupied
with a battle of its own. Donatism (311-411) was for a long time
paramount in Numidia, and sometimes in other parts. The writings
of the Donatists have mostly perished. About 370 St. Optatus
published an effective controversial work against them. The
attack was carried on by a yet greater controversialist, St.
Augustine, with a marvellous success, so that the inveterate
schism was practically at an end twenty years before that
saint's death. So happy an event turned the eyes of all
Christendom to the brilliant protagonist of the African
Catholics, who had already dealt crushing blows at the Latin
Manichaean writers. From 417 till his death in 431, he was
engaged in an even greater conflict with the philosophical and
naturalistic heresy of Pelagius and Caelestius. In this he was
at first assisted by the aged Jerome; the popes condemned the
innovators and the emperor legislated against them. If St.
Augustine has the unique fame of having prostrated three
heresies, it is because he was as anxious to persuade as to
refute. He was perhaps the greatest controversialist the world
has ever seen. Besides this he was not merely the greatest
philosopher among the Fathers, but he was the only great
philosopher. His purely theological works, especially his "De
Trinitate", are unsurpassed for depth, grasp, and clearness,
among early ecclesiastical writers, whether Eastern or Western.
As a philosophical theologian he has no superior, except his own
son and disciple, St. Thomas Aquinas. It is probably correct to
say that no one, except Aristotle, has exercised so vast, so
profound, and so beneficial an influence on European thought.
Augustine was himself a Platonist through and through. As a
commentator he cared little for the letter, and everything for
the spirit, but his harmony of the Gospels shows that he could
attend to history and detail. The allegorizing tendencies he
inherited from his spiritual father, Ambrose, carry him now and
then into extravagances, but more often he rather soars than
commentates, and his "In Genesim ad litteram", and his treatises
on the Psalms and on St. John, are works of extraordinary power
and interest, and quite worthy, in a totally different style, to
rank with Chrysostom on Matthew. St. Augustine was a professor
of rhetoric before his wonderful conversion; but like St.
Cyprian, and even more than St. Cyprian, he put aside, as a
Christian, all the artifices of oratory which he knew so well.
He retained correctness of grammar and perfect good taste,
together with the power of speaking and writing with ease in a
style of masterly simplicity and of dignified though almost
colloquial plainness.
Nothing could be more individual than this style of St.
Augustine's, in which he talks to the reader or to God with
perfect openness and with an astonishing, often almost
exasperating, subtlety of thought. He had the power of seeing
all round a subject and through and through it, and he was too
conscientious not to use this gift to the uttermost.
Large-minded and far-seeing, he was also very learned. He
mastered Greek only in later life, in order to make himself
familiar with the works of the Eastern Fathers. His "De Civitate
Dei" shows vast stores of reading; still more, it puts him in
the first place among apologists. Before his death (431) he was
the object of extraordinary veneration. He had founded a
monastery at Tagaste, which supplied Africa with bishops, and he
lived at Hippo with his clergy in a common life, to which the
Regular Canons of later days have always looked as their model.
The great Dominican Order, the Augustinians, and numberless
congregations of nuns still look to him as their father and
legislator. His devotional works have had a vogue second only to
that of another of his spiritual sons, Thomas `a Kempis. He had
in his lifetime a reputation for miracles, and his sanctity is
felt in all his writings, and breathes in the story of his life.
It has been remarked that there is about this many-sided bishop
a certain symmetry which makes him an almost faultless model of
a holy, wise, and active man. It is well to remember that he was
essentially a penitent.
(9) In Spain, the great poet Prudentius surpassed all his
predecessors, of whom the best had been Juvencus and the almost
pagan rhetorician Ausonius. The curious treatises of the Spanish
heretic Priscillian were discovered only in 1889. In Gaul
Rufinus of Aquileia must be mentioned as the very free
translator of Origen, etc., and of Eusebius's "History", which
he continued up to his own date. In South Italy his friend
Paulinus of Nola has left us pious poems and elaborate letters.
D. (1) The fragments of Nestorius's writings have been collected
by Loofs. Some of them were preserved by a disciple of St.
Augustine, Marius Mercator, who made two collections of
documents, concerning Nestorianism and Pelagianism respectively.
The great adversary of Nestorius, St. Cyril of Alexandria, was
opposed by a yet greater writer, Theodoret, Bishop of Cyrus.
Cyril is a very voluminous writer, and his long commentaries in
the mystical Alexandrian vein do not much interest modern
readers. But his principal letters and treatises on the
Nestorian question show him as a theologian who has a deep
spiritual insight into the meaning of the Incarnation and its
effect upon the human race -- the lifting up of man to union
with God. We see here the influence of Egyptian asceticism, from
Anthony the Great (whose life St. Athanasius wrote), and the
Macarii (one of whom left some valuable works in Greek), and
Pachomius, to his own time. In their ascetical systems, the
union with God by contemplation was naturally the end in view,
but one is surprised how little is made by them of meditation on
the life and Passion of Christ. It is not omitted, but the
tendency as with St. Cyril and with the Monophysites who
believed they followed him, is to think rather of the Godhead
than of the Manhood. The Antiochene school had exaggerated the
contrary tendency, out of opposition to Apollinarianism, which
made Christ's Manhood incomplete, and they thought more of man
united to God than of God made man. Theodoret undoubtedly
avoided the excesses of Theodore and Nestorius, and his doctrine
was accepted at last by St. Leo as orthodox, in spite of his
earlier persistent defence of Nestorius. His history of the
monks is less valuable than the earlier writings of eyewitnesses
-- Palladius in the East, and Rufinus and afterwards Cassian in
the West. But Theodoret's "History" in continuation of Eusebius
contains valuable information. His apologetic and controversial
writings are the works of a good theologian. His masterpieces
are his exegetical works, which are neither oratory like those
of Chrysostom, nor exaggeratedly literal like those of Theodore.
With him the great Antiochene school worthily closes, as the
Alexandrian does with St Cyril. Together with these great men
may be mentioned St. Cyril's spiritual adviser, St. Isidore of
Pelusium, whose 2000 letters deal chiefly with allegorical
exegesis, the commentary on St. Mark by Victor of Antioch, and
the introduction to the interpretation of Scripture by the monk
Hadrian, a manual of the Antiochene method.
(2) The Eutychian controversy produced no great works in the
East. Such works of the Monophysites as have survived are in
Syriac or Coptic versions.
(3) The two Constantinopolitan historians, Socrates and Sozomen,
in spite of errors, contain some data which are precious, since
many of the sources which they used are lost to us. With
Theodoret, their contemporary, they form a triad just in the
middle of the century. St. Nilus of Sinai is the chief among
many ascetical writers.
(4) St. Sulpicius Severus, a Gallic noble, disciple and
biographer of the great St. Martin of Tours, was a classical
scholar, and showed himself an elegant writer in his
"Ecclesiastical History". The school of Lerins produced many
writers besides St. Vincent. We may mention Eucherius, Faustus,
and the great St. Caesarius of Arles (543). Other Gallic writers
are Salvian, St. Sidonius Apollinaris, Gennadius, St. Avitus of
Vienne, and Julianus Pomerius.
(5) In the West, the series of papal decretals begins with Pope
Siricius (384-98). Of the more important popes large numbers of
letters have been preserved. Those of the wise St. Innocent I
(401-17), the hot-headed St. Zosimus (417-8), and the severe St.
Celestine are perhaps the most important in the first half of
the century; in the second half those of Hilarus, Simplicius,
and above all the learned St. Gelasius (492-6). Midway in the
century stands St. Leo, the greatest of the early popes, whose
steadfastness and sanctity saved Rome from Attila, and the
Romans from Genseric. He could be unbending in the enunciation
of principle; he was condescending in the condoning of breaches
of discipline for the sake of peace, and he was a skilful
diplomatist. His sermons and the dogmatic letters in his large
correspondence show him to us as the most lucid of all
theologians. He is clear in his expression, not because he is
superficial, but because he has thought clearly and deeply. He
steers between Nestorianism and Eutychianism, not by using
subtle distinctions or elaborate arguments, but by stating plain
definitions in accurate words. He condemned Monothelitism by
anticipation. His style is careful, with metrical cadences. Its
majestic rhythms and its sonorous closes have invested the Latin
language with a new splendour and dignity.
E. (1) In the sixth century the large correspondence of Pope
Hormisdas is of the highest interest. That century closes with
St. Gregory the Great, whose celebrated "Registrum" exceeds in
volume many times over the collections of the letters of other
early popes. The Epistles are of great variety and throw light
on the varied interests of the great pope's life and the varied
events in the East and West of his time. His "Morals on the Book
of Job" is not a literal commentary, but pretends only to
illustrate the moral sense underlying the text. With all the
strangeness it presents to modern notions, it is a work full of
wisdom and instruction. The remarks of St. Gregory on the
spiritual life and on contemplation are of special interest. As
a theologian he is original only in that he combines all the
traditional theology of the West without adding to it. He
commonly follows Augustine as a theologian, a commentator and a
preacher. His sermons are admirably practical; they are models
of what a good sermon should be. After St. Gregory there are
some great popes whose letters are worthy of study, such as
Nicholas I and John VIII; but these and the many other late
writers of the West belong properly to the medieval period. St.
Gregory of Tours is certainly medieval, but the learned Bede is
quite patristic. His great history is the most faithful and
perfect history to be found in the early centuries.
(2) In the East, the latter half of the fifth century is very
barren. The sixth century is not much better. The importance of
Leontius of Byzantium (died c. 543) for the history of dogma has
only lately been realized. Poets and hagiographers, chroniclers,
canonists, and ascetical writers succeed each other. Catenas by
way of commentaries are the order of the day. St. Maximus
Confessor, Anastasius of Mount Sinai, and Andrew of Caesarea
must be named. The first of these commented on the works of the
pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, which had probably first seen
the light towards the end of the fifth century. St. John of
Damascus (c. 750) closes the patristic period with his polemics
against heresies, his exegetical and ascetical writings, his
beautiful hymns, and above all his "Fountain of Wisdom", which
is a compendium of patristic theology and a kind of anticipation
of scholasticism. Indeed, the "Summae Theologicae" of the Middle
Ages were founded on the "Sentences" of Peter Lombard, who had
taken the skeleton of his work from this last of the Greek
Fathers.
III. CHARACTERISTICS OF PATRISTIC WRITINGS
A. Commentaries. It has been seen that the literal school of
exegesis had its home at Antioch, while the allegorical school
was Alexandrian, and the entire West, on the whole, followed the
allegorical method, mingling literalism with it in various
degrees. The suspicion of Arianism has lost to us the
fourth-century writers of the Antiochene school, such as
Theodore of Heraclea and Eusebius of Emesa, and the charge of
Nestorianism has caused the commentaries of Diodorus and
Theodore of Mopsuestia (for the most part) to disappear. The
Alexandrian school has lost yet more heavily, for little of the
great Origen remains except in fragments and in unreliable
versions. The great Antiochenes, Chrysostom and Theodoret, have
a real grasp of the sense of the sacred text. They treat it with
reverence and love, and their explanations are of deep value,
because the language of the New Testament was their own tongue,
so that we moderns cannot afford to neglect their comments. On
the contrary, Origen, the moulder of the allegorizing type of
commentary, who had inherited the Philonic tradition of the
Alexandrian Jews, was essentially irreverent to the inspired
authors. The Old Testament was to him full of errors, lies, and
blasphemies, so far as the letter was concerned, and his defence
of it against the pagans, the Gnostics, and especially the
Marcionites, was to point only to the spiritual meaning.
Theoretically he distinguished a triple sense, the somatic, the
psychic, and the pneumatic, following St. Paul's trichotomy; but
in practice he mainly gives the spiritual, as opposed to the
corporal or literal.
St. Augustine sometimes defends the Old Testament against the
Manichaeans in the same style, and occasionally in a most
unconvincing manner, but with great moderation and restraint. In
his "De Genesi ad litteram" he has evolved a far more effective
method, with his usual brilliant originality, and he shows that
the objections brought against the truth of the first chapters
of the book invariably rest upon the baseless assumption that
the objector has found the true meaning of the text. But Origen
applied his method, though partially, even to the New Testament,
and regarded the Evangelists as sometimes false in the letter,
but as saving the truth in the hidden spiritual meaning. In this
point the good feeling of Christians prevented his being
followed. But the brilliant example he gave, of running riot in
the fantastic exegesis which his method encouraged, had an
unfortunate influence. He is fond of giving a variety of
applications to a single text, and his promise to hold nothing
but what can be proved from Scripture becomes illusory when he
shows by example that any part of Scripture may mean anything he
pleases. The reverent temper of later writers, and especially of
the Westerns, preferred to represent as the true meaning of the
sacred writer the allegory which appeared to them to be the most
obvious. St. Ambrose and St. Augustine in their beautiful works
on the Psalms rather spiritualize, or moralize, than allegorize,
and their imaginative interpretations are chiefly of events,
actions, numbers, etc. But almost all allegorical interpretation
is so arbitrary and depends so much on the caprice of the
exegete that it is difficult to conciliate it with reverence,
however one may he dazzled by the beauty of much of it. An
alternative way of defending the Old Testament was excogitated
by the ingenious author of the pseudo-Clementines; he asserts
that it has been depraved and interpolated. St. Jerome's
learning has made his exegesis unique; he frequently gives
alternative explanations and refers to the authors who have
adopted them. From the middle of the fifth century onwards,
second-hand commentaries are universal in East and West, and
originality almost entirely disappears. Andrew of Caesarea is
perhaps an exception, for he commented on a book which was
scarcely at all read in the East, the Apocalypse.
Discussions of method are not wanting. Clement of Alexandria
gives "traditional methods", the literal, typical, moral, and
prophetical. The tradition is obviously from Rabbinism. We must
admit that it has in its favour the practice of St. Matthew and
St. Paul. Even more than Origen, St. Augustine theorized on this
subject. In his "De Doctrina Christiana" he gives elaborate
rules of exegesis. Elsewhere he distinguishes four senses of
Scripture: historical, aetiological (economic), analogical
(where N.T. explains 0.T.), and allegorical ("De Util. Cred.",
3; cf. "De Vera Rel.", 50). The book of rules composed by the
Donatist Tichonius has an analogy in the smaller "canons" of St.
Paul's Epistles by Priscillian. Hadrian of Antioch was mentioned
above. St. Gregory the Great compares Scripture to a river so
shallow that a lamb can walk in it, so deep that an elephant can
float. (Pref. to "Morals on Job"). He distinguishes the
historical or literal sense, the moral, and the allegorical or
typical. If the Western Fathers are fanciful, yet this is better
than the extreme literalism of Theodore of Mopsuestia, who
refused to allegorize even the Canticle of Canticles.
B. Preachers. We have sermons from the Greek Church much earlier
than from the Latin. Indeed, Sozomen tells us that, up to his
time (c. 450), there were no public sermons in the churches at
Rome. This seems almost incredible. St. Leo's sermons are,
however, the first sermons certainly preached at Rome which have
reached us, for those of Hippolytus were all in Greek; unless
the homily "Adversus Alcatores" be a sermon by a Novatian
antipope. The series of Latin preachers begins in the middle of
the fourth century. The so-called "Second Epistle of St.
Clement" is a homily belonging possibly to the second century.
Many of the commentaries of Origen are a series of sermons, as
is the case later with all Chrysostom's commentaries and most of
Augustine's. In many cases treatises are composed of a course of
sermons, as, for instance, is the case for some of those of
Ambrose, who seems to have rewritten his sermons after delivery.
The "De Sacramentis" may possibly be the version by a
shorthand-writer of the course which the saint himself edited
under the title "De Mysteriis". In any case the "De Sacramentis"
(whether by Ambrose or not) has a freshness and naivete which is
wanting in the certainly authentic "De Mysteriis". Similarly the
great courses of sermons preached by St. Chrysostom at Antioch
were evidently written or corrected by his own hand, but those
he delivered at Constantinople were either hurriedly corrected,
or not at all. His sermons on Acts, which have come down to us
in two quite distinct texts in the MSS., are probably known to
us only in the forms in which they were taken down by two
different tachygraphers. St. Gregory Nazianzen complains of the
importunity of these shorthand-writers (Orat. xxxii), as St.
Jerome does of their incapacity (Ep. lxxi, 5). Their art was
evidently highly perfected, and specimens of it have come down
to us. They were officially employed at councils (e.g. at the
great conference with the Donatists at Carthage, in 411, we hear
of them). It appears that many or most of the bishops at the
Council of Ephesus, in 449, had their own shorthand-writers with
them. The method of taking notes and of amplifying receives
illustration from the Acts of the Council of Constantinople of
27 April, 449, at which the minutes were examined which had been
taken down by tachygraphers at the council held a few weeks
earlier.
Many of St. Augustine's sermons are certainly from shorthand
notes. As to others we are uncertain, for the style of the
written ones is often so colloquial that it is difficult to get
a criterion. The sermons of St. Jerome at Bethlehem, published
by Dom Morin, are from shorthand reports, and the discourses
themselves were unprepared conferences on those portions of the
Psalms or of the Gospels which had been sung in the liturgy. The
speaker has clearly often been preceded by another priest, and
on the Western Christmas Day, which his community alone is
keeping, the bishop is present and will speak last. In fact the
pilgrim AEtheria tells us that at Jerusalem, in the fourth
century, all the priests present spoke in turn, if they chose,
and the bishop last of all. Such improvised comments are far
indeed from the oratorical discourses of St. Gregory Nazianzen,
from the lofty flights of Chrysostom, from the torrent of
iteration that characterizes the short sermons of Peter
Chrysologus, from the neat phrases of Maximus of Turin, and the
ponderous rhythms of Leo the Great. The eloquence of these
Fathers need not be here described. In the West we may add in
the fourth century Gaudentius of Brescia; several small
collections of interesting sermons appear in the fifth century;
the sixth opens with the numerous collections made by St.
Caesarius for the use of preachers. There is practically no
edition of the works of this eminent and practical bishop. St.
Gregory (apart from some fanciful exegesis) is the most
practical preacher of the West. Nothing could be more admirable
for imitation than St. Chrysostom. The more ornate writers are
less safe to copy. St. Augustine's style is too personal to be
an example, and few are so learned, so great, and so ready, that
they can venture to speak as simply as he often does.
C. Writers. The Fathers do not belong to the strictly classical
period of either the Greek or the Latin language; but this does
not imply that they wrote bad Latin or Greek. The conversational
form of the Koine or common dialect of Greek, which is found in
the New Testament and in many papyri, is not the language of the
Fathers, except of the very earliest. For the Greek Fathers
write in a more classicizing style than most of the New
Testament writers; none of them uses quite a vulgar or
ungrammatical Greek, while some Atticize, e.g. the Cappadocians
and Synesius. The Latin Fathers are often less classical.
Tertullian is a Latin Carlyle; he knew Greek, and wrote books in
that language, and tried to introduce ecclesiastical terms into
Latin. St. Cyprian's "Ad Donatum", probably his first Christian
writing, shows an Apuleian preciosity which he eschewed in all
his other works, but which his biographer Pontius has imitated
and exaggerated. Men like Jerome and Augustine, who had a
thorough knowledge of classical literature, would not employ
tricks of style, and cultivated a manner which should be
correct, but simple and straightforward; yet their style could
not have been what it was but for their previous study. For the
spoken Latin of all the patristic centuries was very different
from the written. We get examples of the vulgar tongue here and
there in the letters of Pope Cornelius as edited by Mercati, for
the third century, or in the Rule of St. Benedict in Woelfflin's
or Dom Mona's editions, for the sixth. In the latter we get such
modernisms as cor murmurantem, post quibus, cum responsoria sua,
which show how the confusing genders and cases of the classics
were disappearing into the more reasonable simplicity of
Italian. Some of the Fathers use the rhythmical endings of the
"cursus" in their prose; some have the later accented endings
which were corruptions of the correct prosodical ones. Familiar
examples of the former are in the older Collects of the Mass; of
the latter the Te Deum is an obvious instance.
D. East and West. Before speaking of the theological
characteristics of the Fathers, we have to take into account the
great division of the Roman Empire into two languages. Language
is the great separator. When two emperors divided the Empire, it
was not quite according to language; nor were the ecclesiastical
divisions more exact, since the great province of Illyricum,
including Macedonia and all Greece, was attached to the West
through at least a large part of the patristic period, and was
governed by the archbishop of Thessalonica, not as its exarch or
patriarch, but as papal legate. But in considering the literary
productions of the age, we must class them as Latin or Greek,
and this is what will be meant here by Western and Eastern. The
understanding of the relations between Greeks and Latins is
often obscured by certain prepossessions. We talk of the
"unchanging East", of the philosophical Greeks as opposed to the
practical Romans, of the reposeful thought of the Oriental mind
over against the rapidity and orderly classification which
characterizes Western intelligence. All this is very misleading,
and it is important to go back to the facts. In the first place,
the East was converted far more rapidly than the West. When
Constantine made Christianity the established religion of both
empires from 323 onwards, there was a striking contrast between
the two. In the West paganism had everywhere a very large
majority, except possibly in Africa. But in the Greek world
Christianity was quite the equal of the old religions in
influence and numbers; in the great cities it might even be
predominant, and some towns were practically Christian. The
story told of St. Gregory the Wonder-Worker, that he found but
seventeen Christians in Neocaesarea when he became bishop, and
that he left but seventeen pagans in the same city when he died
(c. 270-5), must be substantially true. Such a story in the West
would be absurd. The villages of the Latin countries held out
for long, and the pagani retained the worship of the old gods
even after they were all nominally Christianized. In Phrygia, on
the contrary, entire villages were Christian long before
Constantine, though it is true that elsewhere some towns were
still heathen in Julian's day -- Gaza in Palestine is an
example; but then Maiouma, the port of Gaza, was Christian.
Two consequences, amongst others, of this swift evangelization
of the East must be noticed. In the first place, while the slow
progress of the West was favourable to the preservation of the
unchanged tradition, the quick conversion of the East was
accompanied by a rapid development which, in the sphere of
dogma, was hasty, unequal, and fruitful of error. Secondly, the
Eastern religion partook, even during the heroic age of
persecution, of the evil which the West felt so deeply after
Constantine, that is to say, of the crowding into the Church of
multitudes who were only half Christianized, because it was the
fashionable thing to do, or because a part of the beauties of
the new religion and of the absurdities of the old were seen. We
have actually Christian writers, in East and West, such as
Arnobius, and to some extent Lactantius and Julius Africanus,
who show that they are only half instructed in the Faith. This
must have been largely the case among the people in the East.
Tradition in the East was less regarded, and faith was less deep
than in the smaller Western communities. Again, the Latin
writers begin in Africa with Tertullian, just before the third
century, at Rome with Novatian, just in the middle of the third
century, and in Spain and Gaul not till the fourth. But the East
had writers in the first century, and numbers in the second;
there were Gnostic and Christian schools in the second and
third. There had been, indeed, Greek writers at Rome in the
first and second centuries and part of the third. But when the
Roman Church became Latin they were forgotten; the Latin writers
did not cite Clement and Hermas; they totally forgot Hippolytus,
except his chronicle, and his name became merely a theme for
legend.
Though Rome was powerful and venerated in the second century,
and though her tradition remained unbroken, the break in her
literature is complete. Latin literature is thus a century and a
half younger than the Greek; indeed it is practically two
centuries and a half younger. Tertullian stands alone, and he
became a heretic. Until the middle of the fourth century there
had appeared but one Latin Father for the spiritual reading of
the educated Latin Christian, and it is natural that the
stichometry, edited (perhaps semi-officially) under Pope
Liberius for the control of booksellers' prices, gives the works
of St. Cyprian as well as the books of the Latin Bible. This
unique position of St. Cyprian was still recognized at the
beginning of the fifth century. From Cyprian (d. 258) to Hilary
there was scarcely a Latin book that could be recommended for
popular reading except Lactantius's "De mortibus persecutorum",
and there was no theology at all. Even a little later, the
commentaries of Victorinus the Rhetorician were valueless, and
those of Isaac the Jew (?) were odd. The one vigorous period of
Latin literature is the bare century which ends with Leo (d.
461). During that century Rome had been repeatedly captured or
threatened by barbarians; Arian Vandals, besides devastating
Italy and Gaul, had almost destroyed the Catholicism of Spain
and Africa; the Christian British had been murdered in the
English invasion. Yet the West had been able to rival the East
in output and in eloquence and even to surpass it in learning,
depth, and variety. The elder sister knew little of these
productions, but the West was supplied with a considerable body
of translations from the Greek, even in the fourth century. In
the sixth, Cassiodorus took care that the amount should be
increased. This gave the Latins a larger outlook, and even the
decay of learning which Cassiodorus and Agapetus could not
remedy, and which Pope Agatho deplored so humbly in his letter
to the Greek council of 680, was resisted with a certain
persistent vigour.
At Constantinople the means of learning were abundant, and there
were many authors; yet there is a gradual decline till the
fifteenth century. The more notable writers are like flickers
amid dying embers. There were chroniclers and chronographers,
but with little originality. Even the monastery of Studium is
hardly a literary revival. There is in the East no enthusiasm
like that of Cassiodorus, of Isidore, of Alcuin, amid a
barbarian world. Photius had wonderful libraries at his
disposal, yet Bede had wider learning, and probably knew more of
the East than Photius did of the West. The industrious Irish
schools which propagated learning in every part of Europe had no
parallel in the Oriental world. It was after the fifth century
that the East began to be "unchanging". And as the bond with the
West grew less and less continuous, her theology and literature
became more and more mummified; whereas the Latin world
blossomed anew with an Anselm, subtle as Augustine, a Bernard,
rival to Chrysostom, an Aquinas, prince of theologians. Hence we
observe in the early centuries a twofold movement, which must be
spoken of separately: an Eastward movement of theology, by which
the West imposed her dogmas on the reluctant East, and a
Westward movement in most practical things -- organization,
liturgy, ascetics, devotion -- by which the West assimilated the
swifter evolution of the Greeks. We take first the theological
movement.
E. Theology. Throughout the second century the Greek portion of
Christendom bred heresies. The multitude of Gnostic schools
tried to introduce all kinds of foreign elements into
Christianity. Those who taught and believed them did not start
from a belief in the Trinity and the Incarnation such as we are
accustomed to. Marcion formed not a school, but a Church; his
Christology was very far removed from tradition. The Montanists
made a schism which retained the traditional beliefs and
practices, but asserted a new revelation. The leaders of all the
new views came to Rome, and tried to gain a footing there; all
were condemned and excommunicated. At the end of the century,
Rome got all the East to agree with her traditional rule that
Easter should be kept on Sunday. The Churches of Asia Minor had
a different custom. One of their bishops protested. But they
seem to have submitted almost at once. In the first decades of
the third century, Rome impartially repelled opposing heresies,
those which identified the three Persons of the Holy Trinity
with only a modal distinction (Monarchians, Sabellians,
"Patripassians"), and those who, on the contrary, made Christ a
mere man, or seemed to ascribe to the Word of God a distinct
being from that of the Father. This last conception, to our
amazement, is assumed, it would appear, by the early Greek
apologists, though in varying language; Athenagoras (who as an
Athenian may have been in relation with the West) is the only
one who asserts the Unity of the Trinity. Hippolytus (somewhat
diversely in the "Contra Noetum" and in the "Philosophumena," if
they are both his) taught the same division of the Son from the
Father as traditional, and he records that Pope Callistus
condemned him as a Ditheist.
Origen, like many of the others, makes the procession of the
Word depend upon His office of Creator; and if he is orthodox
enough to make the procession an eternal and necessary one, this
is only because he regards Creation itself as necessary and
eternal. His pupil, Dionysius of Alexandria, in combating the
Sabellians, who admitted no real distinctions in the Godhead,
manifested the characteristic weakness of the Greek theology,
but some of his own Egyptians were more correct than their
patriarch, and appealed to Rome. The Alexandrian listened to the
Roman Dionysius, for all respected the unchanging tradition and
unblemished orthodoxy of the See of Peter; his apology accepts
the word "consubstantial", and he explains, no doubt sincerely,
that he had never meant anything else; but he had learnt to see
more clearly, without recognizing how unfortunately worded were
his earlier arguments. He was not present when a council, mainly
of Origenists, justly condemned Paul of Samosata (268); and
these bishops, holding the traditional Eastern view, refused to
use the word "consubstantial" as being too like Sabellianism.
The Arians, disciples of Lucian, rejected (as did the more
moderate Eusebius of Caesarea) the eternity of Creation, and
they were logical enough to argue that consequently "there was
(before time was) when the Word was not", and that He was a
creature. All Christendom was horrified; but the East was soon
appeased by vague explanations, and after Nicaea, real,
undisguised Arianism hardly showed its head for nearly forty
years. The highest point of orthodoxy that the East could reach
is shown in the admirable lectures of St. Cyril of Jerusalem.
There is one God, he teaches, that is the Father, and His Son is
equal to Him in all things, and the Holy Ghost is adored with
Them; we cannot separate Them in our worship. But he does not
ask himself how there are not three Gods; he will not use the
Nicene word "consubstantial", and he never suggests that there
is one Godhead common to the three Persons.
If we turn to the Latins all is different. The essential
Monotheism of Christianity is not saved in the West by saying
there is "one God the Father", as in all the Eastern creeds, but
the theologians teach the unity of the Divine essence, in which
subsist three Persons. If Tertullian and Novatian use
subordinationist language of the Son (perhaps borrowed from the
East), it is of little consequence in comparison with their main
doctrine, that there is one substance of the Father and of the
Son. Callistus excommunicates equally those who deny the
distinction of Persons, and those who refuse to assert the unity
of substance. Pope Dionysius is shocked that his namesake did
not use the word "consubstantial" -- this is more than sixty
years before Nicaea. At that great council a Western bishop has
the first place, with two Roman priests, and the result of the
discussion is that the Roman word "consubstantial" is imposed up
on all. In the East the council is succeeded by a conspiracy of
silence; the Orientals will not use the word. Even Alexandria,
which had kept to the doctrine of Dionysius of Rome, is not
convinced that the policy was good, and Athanasius spends his
life in fighting for Nicaea, yet rarely uses the crucial word.
It takes half a century for the Easterns to digest it; and when
they do so, they do not make the most of its meaning. It is
curious how little interest even Athanasius shows in the Unity
of the Trinity, which he scarcely mentions except when quoting
the Dionysii; it is Didymus and the Cappadocians who word
Trinitarian doctrine in the manner since consecrated by the
centuries -- three hypostases, one usia; but this is merely the
conventional translation of the ancient Latin formula, though it
was new to the East.
If we look back at the three centuries, second, third, and
fourth of which we have been speaking, we shall see that the
Greek-speaking Church taught the Divinity of the Son, and Three
inseparable Persons, and one God the Father, without being able
philosophically to harmonize these conceptions. The attempts
which were made were sometimes condemned as heresy in the one
direction or the other, or at best arrived at unsatisfactory and
erroneous explanations, such as the distinction of the logos
endiathetos and the logos prophorikos or the assertion of the
eternity of Creation. The Latin Church preserved always the
simple tradition of three distinct Persons and one divine
Essence. We must judge the Easterns to have started from a less
perfect tradition, for it would be too harsh to accuse them of
wilfully perverting it. But they show their love of subtle
distinctions at the same time that they lay bare their want of
philosophical grasp. The common people talked theology in the
streets; but the professional theologians did not see that the
root of religion is the unity of God, and that, so far, it is
better to be a Sabellian than a Semi-Arian. There is something
mythological about their conceptions, even in the case of
Origen, however important a thinker he may be in comparison with
other ancients. His conceptions of Christianity dominated the
East for some time, but an Origenist Christianity would never
have influenced the modern world.
The Latin conception of theological doctrine, on the other hand,
was by no means a mere adherence to an uncomprehended tradition.
The Latins in each controversy of these early centuries seized
the main point, and preserved it at all hazards. Never for an
instant did they allow the unity of God to be obscured. The
equality of the Son and his consubstantiality were seen to be
necessary to that unity. The Platonist idea of the need of a
mediator between the transcendent God and Creation does not
entangle them, for they were too clear-headed to suppose that
there could be anything half-way between the finite and the
infinite. In a word, the Latins are philosophers, and the
Easterns are not. The East can speculate and wrangle about
theology, but it cannot grasp a large view. It is in accordance
with this that it was in the West, after all the struggle was
over, that the Trinitarian doctrine was completely systematized
by Augustine; in the West, that the Athanasian creed was
formulated. The same story repeats itself in the fifth century.
The philosophical heresy of Pelagius arose in the West, and in
the West only could it have been exorcized. The schools of
Antioch and Alexandria each insisted on one side of the question
as to the union of the two Natures in the Incarnation; the one
School fell into Nestorianism, the other into Eutychianism,
though the leaders were orthodox. But neither Cyril nor the
great Theodoret was able to rise above the controversy, and
express the two complementary truths in one consistent doctrine.
They held what St. Leo held; but, omitting their interminable
arguments and proofs, the Latin writer words the true doctrine
once for all, because he sees it philosophically. No wonder that
the most popular of the Eastern Fathers has always been
untheological Chrysostom, whereas the most popular of the
Western Fathers is the philosopher Augustine. Whenever the East
was severed from the West, it contributed nothing to the
elucidation and development of dogma, and when united, its
contribution was mostly to make difficulties for the West to
unravel.
But the West has continued without ceasing its work of
exposition and evolution. After the fifth century there is not
much development or definition in the patristic period; the
dogmas defined needed only a reference to antiquity. But again
and again Rome had to impose her dogmas on Byzantium -- 519,
680, and 786 are famous dates, when the whole Eastern Church had
to accept a papal document for the sake of reunion, and the
intervals between these dates supply lesser instances. The
Eastern Church had always possessed a traditional belief in
Roman tradition and in the duty of recourse to the See of Peter;
the Arians expressed it when they wrote to Pope Julius to
deprecate interference -- Rome, they said, was "the metropolis
of the faith from the beginning". In the sixth, seventh, and
eighth centuries the lesson had been learnt thoroughly, and the
East proclaimed the papal prerogatives, and appealed to them
with a fervour which experience had taught to be in place. In
such a sketch as this, all elements cannot be taken into
consideration. It is obvious that Eastern theology had a great
and varied influence on Latin Christendom. But the essential
truth remains that the West thought more clearly than the East,
while preserving with greater faithfulness a more explicit
tradition as to cardinal dogmas, and that the West imposed her
doctrines and her definitions on the East, and repeatedly, if
necessary, reasserted and reimposed them.
F. Discipline, Liturgy, Ascetics. According to tradition, the
multiplication of bishoprics, so that each city had its own
bishop, began in the province of Asia, under the direction of
St. John. The development was uneven. There may have been but
one see in Egypt at the end of the second century, though there
were large numbers in all the provinces of Asia Minor, and a
great many in Phoenicia and Palestine. Groupings under
metropolitan sees began in that century in the East, and in the
third century this organization was recognized as a matter of
course. Over metropolitans are the patriarchs. This method of
grouping spread to the West. At first Africa had the most
numerous sees; in the middle of the third century there were
about a hundred, and they quickly increased to more than four
times that number. But each province of Africa had not a
metropolitan see; only a presidency was accorded to the senior
bishop, except in Proconsularis, where Carthage was the
metropolis of the province and her bishop was the first of all
Africa. His rights are undefined, though his influence was
great. But Rome was near, and the pope had certainly far more
actual power, as well as more recognized right, than the
primate; we see this in Tertullian's time, and it remains true
in spite of the resistance of Cyprian. The other countries,
Italy, Spain, Gaul, were gradually organized according to the
Greek model, and the Greek metropolis, patriarch, were adapted.
Councils were held early in the West. But disciplinary canons
were first enacted in the East. St. Cyprian's large councils
passed no canons, and that saint considered that each bishop is
answerable to God alone for the government of his diocese; in
other words, he knows no canon law. The foundation of Latin
canon law is in the canons of Eastern councils, which open the
Western collections. in spite of this, we need not suppose the
East was more regular, or better governed, than the West, where
the popes guarded order and justice. But the East had larger
communities, and they had developed more fully, and therefore
the need arose earlier there to commit definite rules to
writing.
The florid taste of the East soon decorated the liturgy with
beautiful excrescences. Many such excellent practices moved
Westward; the Latin rites borrowed prayers and songs, antiphons,
antiphonal singing, the use of the alleluia, of the doxology,
etc. If the East adopted the Latin Christmas Day, the West
imported not merely the Greek Epiphany, but feast after feast,
in the fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh centuries. The West
joined in devotion to Eastern martyrs. The special honour and
love of Our Lady is at first characteristic of the East (except
Antioch), and then conquers the West. The parcelling of the
bodies of the saints as relics for devotional purposes, spread
all over the West from the East; only Rome held out, until the
time of St. Gregory the Great, against what might be thought an
irreverence rather than an honour to the saints. If the first
three centuries are full of pilgrimages to Rome from the East,
yet from the fourth century onward West joins with East in
making Jerusalem the principal goal of such pious journeys; and
these voyagers brought back much knowledge of the East to the
most distant parts of the West. Monasticism began in Egypt with
Paul and Anthony, and spread from Egypt to Syria; St. Athanasius
brought the knowledge of it to the West, and the Western
monachism of Jerome and Augustine, of Honoratus and Martin, of
Benedict and Columba, always looked to the East, to Anthony and
Pachomius and Hilarion, and above all to Basil, for its most
perfect models. Edifying literature in the form of the lives of
the saints began with Athanasius, and was imitated by Jerome.
But the Latin writers, Rufinus and Cassian, gave accounts of
Eastern monachism, and Palladius and the later Greek writers
were early translated into Latin. Soon indeed there were lives
of Latin saints, of which that of St. Martin was the most
famous, but the year 600 had almost come when St. Gregory the
Great felt it still necessary to protest that as good might be
found in Italy as in Egypt and Syria, and published his
dialogues to prove his point, by supplying edifying stories of
his own country to put beside the older histories of the monks.
It would be out of place here to go more into detail in these
subjects. Enough has been said to show that the West borrowed,
with open-minded simplicity and humility, from the elder East
all kinds of practical and useful ways in ecclesiastical affairs
and in the Christian life. The converse influence in practical
matters of West on East was naturally very small.
G. Historical Materials. The principal ancient historians of the
patristic period were mentioned above. They cannot always be
completely trusted. The continuators of Eusebius, that is,
Rufinus, Socrates, Sozomen, Theodoret, are not to be compared to
Eusebius himself, for that industrious prelate has fortunately
bequeathed to us rather a collection of invaluable materials
than a history. His "Life" or rather "Panegyric of Constantine"
is less remarkable for its contents than for its politic
omissions. Eusebius found his materials in the library of
Pamphilus at Caesarea, and still more in that left by Bishop
Alexander at Jerusalem. He cites earlier collections of
documents, the letters of Dionysius of Corinth, Dionysius of
Alexandria, Serapion of Antioch, some of the epistles sent to
Pope Victor by councils throughout the Church, besides employing
earlier writers of history or memoirs such as Papias,
Hegesippus, Apollonius, an anonymous opponent of the Montanists,
the "Little Labyrinth "of Hippolytus (?), etc. The principal
additions we can still make to these precious remnants are,
first, St. Irenaeus on the heresies; then the works of
Tertullian, full of valuable information about the controversies
of his own time and place and the customs of the Western Church,
and containing also some less valuable information about earlier
matters -- less valuable, because Tertullian is singularly
careless and deficient in historical sense. Next, we possess the
correspondence of St. Cyprian, comprising letters of African
councils, of St. Cornelius and others, besides those of the
saint himself. To all this fragmentary information we can add
much from St. Epiphanius, something from St. Jerome and also
from Photius and Byzantine chronographers. The whole Ante-Nicene
evidence has been catalogued with wonderful industry by Harnack,
with the help of Preuschen and others, in a book of 1021 pages,
the first volume of his invaluable "History of Early Christian
Literature". In the middle of the fourth century, St.
Epiphanius's book on heresies is learned but confused; it is
most annoying to think how useful it would have been had its
pious author quoted his authorities by name, as Eusebius did. As
it is, we can with difficulty, if at all, discover whether his
sources are to be depended on or not. St. Jerome's lives of
illustrious men are carelessly put together, mainly from
Eusebius, but with additional information of great value, where
we can trust its accuracy. Gennadius of Marseilles continued
this work with great profit to us. The Western cataloguers of
heresies, such as Philastrius, Praedestinatus, and St.
Augustine, are less useful.
Collections of documents are the most important matter of all.
In the Arian controversy the collections published by St.
Athanasius in his apologetic works are first-rate authorities.
Of those put together by St. Hilary only fragments survive.
Another dossier by the Homoiousian Sabinus, Bishop of Heraclea,
was known to Socrates, and we can trace its use by him. A
collection of documents connected with the origins of Donatism
was made towards the beginning of the fourth century, and was
appended by St. Optatus to his great work. Unfortunately only a
part is preserved; but much of the lost matter is quoted by
Optatus and Augustine. A pupil of St. Augustine, Marius
Mercator, happened to be at Constantinople during the Nestorian
controversy, and he formed an interesting collection of pieces
justificatives. He put together a corresponding set of papers
bearing on the Pelagian controversy. Irenaeus, Bishop of Tyre,
amassed documents bearing on Nestonianism, as a brief in his own
defence. These have been preserved to us in the reply of an
opponent, who has added a great number. Another kind of
collection is that of letters. St. Isidore's and St. Augustine's
are immensely numerous, but bear little upon history. There is
far more historical matter in those (for instance) of Ambrose
and Jerome, Basil and Chrysostom. Those of the popes are
numerous, and of first-rate value; and the large collections of
them also contain letters addressed to the popes. The
correspondence of Leo and of Hormisdas is very complete. Besides
these collections of papal letters and the decretals, we have
separate collections, of which two are important, the Collectio
Avellana, and that of Stephen of Larissa.
Councils supply another great historical source. Those of
Nicaea, Sardica, Constantinople, have left us no Acts, only some
letters and canons. Of the later oecumenical councils we have
not only the detailed Acts, but also numbers of letters
connected with them. Many smaller councils have also been
preserved in the later collections; those made by Ferrandus of
Carthage and Dionysius the Little deserve special mention. In
many cases the Acts of one council are preserved by another at
which they were read. For example, in 418, a Council of Carthage
recited all the canons of former African plenary councils in the
presence of a papal legate; the Council of Chalcedon embodies
all the Acts of the first session of the Robber Council of
Ephesus, and the Acts of that session contained the Acts of two
synods of Constantinople. The later sessions of the Robber
Council (preserved only in Syriac) contain a number of documents
concerning inquiries and trials of prelates. Much information of
various kinds has been derived of late years from Syriac and
Coptic sources, and even from the Arabic, Armenian, Persian,
Ethiopia and Slavonic. It is not necessary to speak here of the
patristic writings as sources for our knowledge of Church
organization, ecclesiastical geography, liturgies. canon law and
procedure, archaeology, etc. The sources are, however, much the
same for all these branches as for history proper.
IV. PATRISTIC STUDY
A. Editors of the Fathers. The earliest histories of patristic
literature are those contained in Eusebius and in Jerome's "De
viris illustribus". They were followed by Gennadius, who
continued Eusebius, by St. Isidore of Seville, and by St.
Ildephonsus of Toledo. In the Middle Ages the best known are
Sigebert of the monastery of Gembloux (d. 1112), and Trithemius,
Abbot of Sponheim and of Wuerzburg (d. 1516). Between these come
an anonymous monk of Melk (Mellicensis, c. 1135) and Honorius of
Autun (1122-5). Ancient editors are not wanting; for instance,
many anonymous works, like the Pseudo-Clementines and Apostolic
Constitutions, have been remodelled more than once; the
translators of Origen (Jerome, Rufinus, and unknown persons) cut
out, altered, added; St. Jerome published an expurgated edition
of Victoninus "On the Apocalypse". Pamphilus made a list of
Origen's writings, and Possidius did the same for those of
Augustine.
The great editions of the Fathers began when printing had become
common. One of the earliest editors was Faber Stapulensis
(Lefevre d'Estaples), whose edition of Dionysius the Areopagite
was published in 1498. The Belgian Pamele (1536-87) published
much. The controversialist Feuardent, a Franciscan (1539-1610)
did some good editing. The sixteenth century produced gigantic
works of history. The Protestant "Centuriators" of Magdeburg
described thirteen centuries in as many volumes (1559-74).
Cardinal Baronius (1538-1607) replied with his famous "Annales
Ecclesiastici", reaching to the year 1198 (12 vols., 1588-1607).
Marguerin de la Bigne, a doctor of the Sorbonne (1546-89),
published his "Bibliotheca veterum Patrum" (9 vols., 1577-9) to
assist in refuting the Centuriators.
The great Jesuit editors were almost in the seventeenth century;
Gretserus (1562-1625), Fronto Ducaeus (Fronton du Duc,
1558-1624), Andreas Schott (1552-1629), were diligent editors of
the Greek Fathers. The celebrated Sirmond (1559-1651) continued
to publish Greek Fathers and councils and much else, from the
age of 51 to 92. Denis Petau (Petavius, 1583-1652) edited Greek
Fathers, wrote on chronology, and produced an incomparable book
of historical theology, "De theologicis dogmatibus" (1044). To
these may be added the ascetic Halloix (1572-1656), the
uncritical Chifflet (1592-1682), and Jean Garnier, the historian
of the Pelagians (d. 1681). The greatest work of the Society of
Jesus is the publication of the "Acta Sanctorum", which has now
reached the beginning of November, in 64 volumes. It was planned
by Rosweyde (1570-1629) as a large collection of lives of
saints; but the founder of the work as we have it is the famous
John van Bolland (1596-1665). He was joined in 1643 by
Henschenius and Papebrochius (1628-1714), and thus the Society
of Bollandists began, and continued, in spite of the suppression
of the Jesuits, until the French Revolution, 1794. It was
happily revived in 1836 (see Bollandists). Other Catholic
editors were Gerhard Voss (d. 1609), Albaspinaeus (De
l'Aubespine, Bishop of Orleans, 1579-1630), Rigault (1577-1654),
and the Sorbonne doctor Cotelier (1629-86). The Dominican
Combefis (1605-79) edited Greek Fathers, added two volumes to de
la Bigne's collection, and made collections of patristic
sermons. The layman Valesius (de Valois, 1603-70) was of great
eminence.
Among Protestants may be mentioned the controversialist Clericus
(Le Clerc, 1657-1736); Bishop Fell of Oxford (1625-86), the
editor of Cyprian, with whom must be classed Bishop Pearson and
Dodwell; Grabe (1666-1711), a Prussian who settled in England;
the Calvinist Basnage (1653-1723). The famous Gallican Etienne
Baluze (1630-1718), was an editor of great industry. The
Provenc,al Franciscan, Pagi, published an invaluable commentary
on Baronius in 1689-1705. But the greatest historical
achievement was that of a secular priest, Louis Le Nain de
Tillemont, whose "Histoire des Empereurs" (6 vols., 1690) and
"Memoires pour servir `a l'histoire ecclesiastique des six
premiers siecles" (16 vols., 1693) have never been superseded or
equalled. Other historians are Cardinal H. Noris (1631-1704);
Natalis Alexander (1639-1725), a Dominican; Fleury (in French,
1690-1719). To these must be added the Protestant Archbishop
Ussher of Dublin (1580-1656), and many canonists, such as Van
Espen, Du Pin, La Marca, and Christianus Lupus. The Oratorian
Thomassin wrote on Christian antiquities (1619-95); the English
Bingham composed a great work on the same subject (1708-22).
Holstein (1596-1661), a convert from Protestantism, was
librarian at the Vatican, and published collections of
documents. The Oratorian J. Morin (1597-1659) published a famous
work on the history of Holy orders, and a confused one on that
of penance. The chief patristic theologian among English
Protestants is Bishop Bull, who wrote a reply to Petavius's
views on the development of dogma, entitled "Defensio fidei
Nicaenae" (1685). The Greek Leo Allatius (1586-1669), custos of
the Vatican Library, was almost a second Bessarion. He wrote on
dogma and on the ecclesiastical books of the Greeks. A century
later the Maronite J. S. Assemani (1687-1768) published amongst
other works a "Bibliotheca Orientalis" and an edition of Ephrem
Syrus. His nephew edited an immense collection of liturgies. The
chief liturgiologist of the seventeenth century is the Blessed
Cardinal Tommasi, a Theatine (1649-1713, beatified 1803), the
type of a saintly savant.
The great Benedictines form a group by themselves, for (apart
from Dom Calmet, a Biblical scholar, and Dom Ceillier, who
belonged to the Congregation of St-Vannes) all were of the
Congregation of St-Maur, the learned men of which were drafted
into the Abbey of St-Germain-des-Pres at Paris. Dom Luc d'Achery
(1605-85) is the founder ("Spicilegium", 13 vols.); Dom Mabillon
(1632-1707) is the greatest name, but he was mainly occupied
with the early Middle Ages. Bernard de Montfaucon (1655-1741)
has almost equal fame (Athanasius, Hexapla of Origen,
Chrysostom, Antiquities, Palaeography). Dom Coustant (1654-1721)
was the principal collaborator, it seems, in the great edition
of St. Augustine (1679-1700; also letters of the Popes, Hilary).
Dom Garet (Cassiodorus, 1679), Du Friche (St Ambrose, 1686-90),
Martianay (St. Jerome, 1693-1706, less successful), Delarue
(Origen, 1733-59), Maran (with Toutee, Cyril of Jerusalem, 1720;
alone, the Apologists, 1742; Gregory Nazianzen, unfinished),
Massuet (Irenaeus, 1710), Ste-Marthe (Gregory the Great, 1705),
Julien Garnier (St. Basil, 1721-2), Ruinart (Acta Martyrum
sincera, 1689, Victor Vitensis, 1694, and Gregory of Tours and
Fredegar, 1699), are all well-known names. The works of Martene
(1654-1739) on ecclesiastical and monastic rites (1690 and
1700-2) and his collections of anecdota (1700, 1717, and
1724-33) are most voluminous; he was assisted by Durand. The
great historical works of the Benedictines of St-Maur need not
be mentioned here, but Dom Sabatier's edition of the Old Latin
Bible, and the new editions of Du Cange's glossaries must be
noted. For the great editors of collections of councils see
under the names mentioned in the bibliography of the article on
Councils.
In the eighteenth century may be noted Archbishop Potter
(1674-1747, Clement of Alexandria). At Rome Arevalo (Isidore of
Seville, 1797-1803); Gallandi, a Venetian Oratorian (Bibliotheca
veterum Patrum, 1765-81). The Veronese scholars form a
remarkable group. The historian Maffei (for our purpose his
"anecdota of Cassiodorus" are to be noted, 1702), Vallarsi (St.
Jerome, 1734-42, a great work, and Rufinus, 1745), the brothers
Ballerini (St. Zeno, 1739; St. Leo, 1753-7, a most remarkable
production), not to speak of Bianchini, who published codices of
the Old Latin Gospels, and the Dominican Mansi, Archbishop of
Lucca, who re-edited Baronius, Fabricius, Thomassinus, Baluze,
etc., as well as the "Collectio Amplissima" of councils. A
general conspectus shows us the Jesuits taking the lead c.
1590-1650, and the Benedictines working about 1680-1750. The
French are always in the first place. There are some sparse
names of eminence in Protestant England; a few in Germany; Italy
takes the lead in the second half of the eighteenth century. The
great literary histories of Bellarmine, Fabricius, Du Pin, Cave,
Oudin, Schram, Lumper, Ziegelbauer, and Schoenemann will be
found below in the bibliography. The first half of the
nineteenth century was singularly barren of patristic study;
nevertheless there were marks of the commencement of the new era
in which Germany takes the head. The second half of the
nineteenth was exceptionally and increasingly prolific. It is
impossible to enumerate the chief editors and critics. New
matter was poured forth by Cardinal Mai (1782-1854) and Cardinal
Pitra (1812- 89), both prefects of the Vatican Library. Inedita
in such quantities seem to be found no more, but isolated
discoveries have come frequently and still come; Eastern
libraries, such as those of Mount Athos and Patmos,
Constantinople, and Jerusalem, and Mount Sinai, have yielded
unknown treasures, while the Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, etc.,
have supplied many losses supposed to be irrecoverable. The
sands of Egypt have given something, but not much, to patrology.
The greatest boon in the way of editing has been the two great
patrologies of the Abbe Migne (1800-75). This energetic man put
the works of all the Greek and Latin Fathers within easy reach
by the "Patrologia Latina" (222 vols., including 4 vols. of
indexes) and the "Patrologia Graeca" (161 vols). The Ateliers
Catholiques which he founded produced wood-carving, pictures,
organs, etc., but printing was the special work. The workshops
were destroyed by a disastrous fire in 1868, and the
recommencement of the work was made impossible by the
Franco-German war. The "Monumenta Germaniae", begun by the
Berlin librarian Pertz, was continued with vigour under the most
celebrated scholar of the century, Theodor Mommsen. Small
collections of patristic works are catalogued below. A new
edition of the Latin Fathers was undertaken in the sixties by
the Academy of Vienna. The volumes published up till now have
been uniformly creditable works which call up no particular
enthusiasm. At the present rate of progress some centuries will
be needed for the great work. The Berlin Academy has commenced a
more modest task, the re-editing of the Greek Ante-Nicene
writers, and the energy of Adolf Harnack is ensuring rapid
publication and real success. The same indefatigable student,
with von Gebhardt, edits a series of "Texte und Untersuchungen",
which have for a part of their object to be the organ of the
Berlin editors of the Fathers. The series contains many valuable
studies, with much that would hardly have been published in
other countries.
The Cambridge series of "Texts and Studies" is younger and
proceeds more slowly, but keeps at a rather higher level. There
should be mentioned also the Italian "Studii e Testi", in which
Mercati and Pio Franchi de' Cavalieri collaborate. In England,
in spite of the slight revival of interest in patristic studies
caused by the Oxford Movement, the amount of work has not been
great. For learning perhaps Newman is really first in the
theological questions. As critics the Cambridge School,
Westcott, Hort, and above all Lightfoot, are second to none. But
the amount edited has been very small, and the excellent
"Dictionary of Christian Biography" is the only great work
published. Until 1898 there was absolutely no organ for
patristic studies, and the "Journal of Theological Studies"
founded in that year would have found it difficult to survive
financially without the help of the Oxford University Press. But
there has been an increase of interest in these subjects of late
years, both among Protestants and Catholics, in England and in
the United States. Catholic France has lately been coming once
more to the fore, and is very nearly level with Germany even in
output. In the last fifty years, archaeology has added much to
patristic studies; in this sphere the greatest name is that of
De Rossi.
B. The Study of the Fathers. The helps to study, such as
Patrologies, lexical information, literary histories, are
mentioned below.
COLLECTIONS:-- The chief collections of the Fathers are the
following: DE LA BIGNE, Bibliotheca SS. PP. (5 vols. fol.,
Paris, 1575, and App., 1579; 4th ed., 10 vols., 1624, with
Auctarium, 2 vols., 1624, and Suppl., 1639, 5th and 6th edd., 17
vols. fol., 1644 and 1654); this great work is a supplement of
over 200 writings to the editions till then published of the
Fathers; enlarged ed. hy UNIV. OF COLOGNE (Cologne, 1618, 14
vols., and App., 1622); the Cologne ed. enlarged by 100
writings, in 27 folio vols. (Lyons, 1677). COMBEFIS,
Graeco-Latinae Patrum Bibliothecae novum Auctarium (2 vols.,
Paris, 1648), and Auctarium novissimum (2 vols., Paris, 1672);
D'Achery, Veterum aliquot scriptorum Spicilegium (13 vols. 4to,
Paris, 1655-77, and 3 vols. fol., 1723), mostly of writings
later than patristic period, as is also the case with BALUZE,
Miscellanea (7 vols. 8vo, Paris, 1678-1715); re-ed. by MANSI (4
vols. fol., Lucca, 1761-4); SIRMOND, Opera varia nunc primum
collecta (5 vols. fol., Paris, 1696, and Venice, 1728);
MURATORI, Anecdota from the Ambrosian Libr. at Milan (4 vols.
4to, Milan, 1697-8; Padua, 1713); IDEM, Anecdota graeca (Padua,
1709); GRABE, Spicilegium of Fathers of the first and second
centuries (Oxford, 1698-9, 1700, and enlarged, 1714); GALLANDI,
Bibl. vet. PP., an enlarged edition of the Lyons ed. of de la
Bigne (14 vols. fol., Venice, 1765-88, and index puhl. at
Bologna, 1863) -- nearly all the contents are reprinted in
MIGNE; OBERTHUeR, SS. Patrum opera polemica de veriate
religionis christ. c. Gent. et Jud. (21 vols. 8vo, Wuerzburg,
1777-94); IDEM, Opera omnia SS. Patrum Latinorum (13 vols.,
Wuerzburg, 1789-91); ROUTH, Reliquiae sacrae, second and third
centuries (4 vols., Oxford, 1814-18; in 5 vols., 1846-8); IDEM,
Scriptorum eccl. opuscula praeipua (2 vols., Oxford, 1832, 3rd
vol., 1858); MAT, Scriptorum veterum nova collectio (unpubl.
matter from Vatican MSS., 10 vols. 4to, 1825-38); IDEM,
Spicileqium Romanum (10 vols. Svo, Rome, 1839-44); IDEM, Nova
Patrum Bibtiotheca (7 vols. 4to, Rome, 1844-54; vol. 8 completed
by COZZA-LUZI, 1871, vol. 9 by COZZA-LUZI, 1888, App. ad opera
ed. ab A. Maio, Rome, 1871, App. altera, 1871). A few eccl.
writings in MAI's Classici auctores (10 vols., Rome, 1828-38);
CAILLAU, Collectio selecta SS. Ecclesia Patrum (133 vols. em.
8vo, Paris, 1829-42); GERSDORF, Bibl. Patrum eccl. lat. selecta
(13 vols., Leipzig, 1838-47); the Oxford Bibliotheca Patrum
reached 10 vols. (Oxford, 1838-55); PITRA, Spicilegium
Solesmense (4 vols. 4to, Paris, 1852-8). The number of these
various collections, in addition to the works of the great
Fathers, made it difficult to obtain a complete set of patristic
writings. MIGNE supplied the want by collecting almost all the
foregoing (except the end of the last mentioned work, and Mais
later volumes) into his complete editions: Patrologiae cursus
completus, Series latine (to Innocent III, A.D. 1300, 221 vols.
4to, including four vols. of indexes, 1844-55), Series
graeco-latine (to the Council of Florence, A.D. 1438-9, 161
vols. 4to, 1857-66, and another rare vol. of additions, 1866);
the Series graece was also published, in Latin only, in 81
vols.; there is no index in the Series grace; an alphabetical
list of contents by SCHOLAREOS (Athens, 1879, useful); other
publications, not included in Migne, by PITRA, are Juris
ecclesiastici Graecarum hist. et monum. (2 vols., Rome, 1864-8);
Analecta sacra (6 vols., numbered I, II, III, IV, VI, VIII,
Paris, 1876-84); Analecta sacra et classica (Paris, 1888);
Analecta novissima, medieval (2 vols., 1885-8); the new edition
of Latin Fathers is called Corpus scriptorum ecclesiasticorum
latinorum, editum consilio et impensis Academiae litterarum
Caesarea Vindobonensis (Vienna, 1866, 8vo, in progress); and of
the Greek Fathers: Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller
der ersten drei Jahrhunderten, herausgegeben von der
Kirchenvaetter-Kommission den Koenigl. preussiechen Akad. den
Wise. (Berlin, 1897, large 8vo, in progress). Of the Monumenta
Germaniae historica, one portion, the Auctores antiquissimi
(Berlin, 1877-98), contains works of the sixth century which
connect themselves with patrology. Small modern collections are
HURTER, SS. Patrum opuscula selecta, with a few good notes
(Innebruck, 1st series, 48 vols., 1868-85, 2nd series, 6 vols..
1884-92) -- these little books have been deservedly popular;
KRUeGER, Semmlung ausgewaehlter kirchen- und
dogmengeschichtlicher Quellenechriften (Freiburg, 1891-);
RAUSCHEN, Florilegium patristicum, of first and second centuries
(3 fasc., Bonn, 1904-5); Cambridge patristic texts (I, The Five
Theol. Orat. of Greg. Naz., ed. MASON, 1899; II, The Catech. Or.
of Greg. Nyssen., ed. SRAWLEY, 1903; Dionysius Alex., ed.
FELTRE, 1904, in progress); VIZZINI, Bibl. SS. PP. Theologiae
tironibus et universo clero accomodata (Rome, 1901- in
progress); LIETZMANN, Kleine Texte, fuer theol. Vorlesungen und
Uebungen (twenty-five numbers have appeared of about 16 pp.
each, Bonn, 1902- in progress); an English ed. of the same
(Cambridge, 1903-); Textes et documents pour l'etude historique
du chrietienisme, ed. HEMMER AND LEJAY (texts, French tr., and
notes, Paris, in progress -- an admirable series).
INITIA:-- For Greek and Latin writers up to Eusebius, the index
to HARNACK, Gesch. der altchr. Litt., I; for the Latin writers
of first six centuries, AUMERS, Initia libronum PP. lat.
(Vienna, 1865); and up to 1200, VATASSO, Initia PP. aliorumque
scriptorum sect, lat. (2 vols., Vatican press, 1906-8).
LITERARY HISTORIES:-- The first is BELLARMINE, De Scriptoribus
ecclesiasticis (Rome, 1613, often reprinted; with additions by
LABBE, Paris, 1660, and by OUDEN, Paris, 1686); DE PIN,
Bibliotheque universelle des auteurs eccles. (61 vols. 8vo, or
19 vols. 4to, Paris, 1686, etc.); this was severely criticized
by the Benedictine PETITDIDIER and by the Oratorian SIMON
(Critique de la Bibl. des auteurs eccl. publ. pen ill. E. Dupin,
Paris, 1730), and Du Pin's work was put on the Index in 1757;
FABACCEUS, Bibliotheca Graece, sive edititia Scriptorum veterum
Graecorum (Hamburg, 1705-28, 14 vols.; new ed. by HARLES,
Hamburg, 1790-1809, 12 vols., embraces not quite 11 vole, of the
original ed.; index to this ed., Leipzig, 1838) -- this great
work is really a vast collection of materials; Fabricius was a
Protestant (d. 1736); he made a smaller collection of the Latin
lit. hist., Bibl. Latina, sive non. scr. vett, latt. (1697,
1708, 1712, etc., ed. by ERNESTI, 3 vols., Leipzig, 1773-4), and
a continuation for the Middle Ages (1734-6, 5 vols.); the whole
was re-edited by MANSI (6 vols., Padua, 1754, and Florence,
1858-9); LE NOURRY, Apparatus ad Biblioth. Max. vett. Patr. (2
vols. fol., Paris, 1703-15), deals with Greek Fathers of the
second century and with Latin apologists; CEILLIER, Hist.
generale des auteurs sacres et eccles. (from Moses to 1248, 23
vols., Paris, 1729-63; Table gen. des Met., by RONDET, Paris,
1782; new ed. 16 vols., Paris, 1858-69); SCHRAM, Analysis Operum
SS. PP. et Scriptorum eccles. (Vienna, 1780-96, 18 vols., a
valuable work); LUMPER, Hist. Theologico-critica de vita
scriptis atque doctrina SS. PP. at scr. eccl. trium primorum
saec. (Vienna, 1783-99, 13 vols.; a compilation, but good); the
Anglican CAVE published a fine work, Scriptorum eccl. historia
literaria (London, 1688; best ed., Oxford, 1740-3); OUDIN, a
Premonstratensian, who became a Protestant, Commentarius de
Scriptoribus eccl. (founded on Bellarmine, 3 vols. fol.,
Leipzig, 1722). On the editions of the Latin Fathers,
SCHOENEMANN, Bibliotheca historico-litteraria Patrum Latinorum a
Tert, ad Greg. M. at Isid. Hisp. (2 vols., Leipzig, 1792-4).
PATROLOGIES (smaller works):-- GERHARD, Patrologia (Jena, 1653);
HUeLSEMANN, Patrologia (Leipzig, 1670); OLEARIUS, Abacus
Patrologicus (Jena, 1673); these are old-fashioned Protestant
books. German Catholic works are: GOLDWITZER, Bibliographie der
Kirchenvaeter und Kirchenlehrer (Landshut, 1828); IDEM,
Patrologie verbunden mi Patristik (Nuremberg, 1833-4); the older
distinction in Germany between patrology, the knowledge of the
Fathers and their use, and patristic, the science of the
theology of the Fathers, is now somewhat antiquated; BUSSE,
Grundriss der chr. Lit. (Muenster, 1828-9); MOeHLER, Patrologie,
an important posthumous work of this great man, giving the first
three centuries (Ratisbon, 1840); PERMANEDER, Bibliotheca
patristica (2 vols., Landshut, 1841-4); FESSLER, Institutiones
Patrologiae (Innsbruck, 1851), a new ed. by JUNGMANN is most
valuable (Innsbruck, 1890-6); ALZOG, Grundriss der Patrologie
(Freiburg im Br., 1866 and 1888); same in French by BELET
(Paris, 1867); NIRSCHL, Handbuch der Patrologie und Patristik
(Mainz, 1881-5); RESBANYAY, Compendium Patrologiae et
Patristicae (Funfkirchen in Hungary, 1894); CARVAJAL,
Institutiones Patrologiae (Oviedo, 1906); BARDENHEWER,
Patrologie (Freiburg im Br., 1894; new ed. 1901) -- this is at
present by far the best handbook; the author is a professor in
the Cath. theo. faculty of the Univ. of Munich; a French tr. by
GODET AND VERSCHAFFEL, Les Peres de l'Eglise (3 vols., Paris,
1899); an Italian tr. by A. MERCATI (Rome, 1903); and an English
tr. with the bibliography brought up to date, by SHAHAN
(Freiburg im Br. and St. Louis, 1908); smaller works,
insufficient for advanced students, but excellent for ordinary
purposes, are: SCHMID, Grundlinien der Patrologie (1879; 4th
ed., Freiburg im Br., 1895); an Engl. tr. revised by SCHOBEL
(Freiburg, 1900); SWETE of Cambridge, Patristic Study (London,
1902).
HISTORIES OF THE FATHERS:-- It is unnecessary to catalogue here
all the general histories of the Church, large and small, from
Baronius onwards; it will be sufficient to give some of those
which deal specially with the Fathers and with ecclesiastical
literature. The first and chief is the incomparable work of
TILLEMONT, Memoires pour servir `a l'histoire eccl. des six
premiers siecles (Paris, 1693-1712, 16 vols., and other
editions); MARECHAL, Concordance des SS. Peres de l'Eglise,
Grecs at Latins, a harmony of their theology (2 vols., Paris,
1739); BAeHR, Die christlich-roemische Litteratur (4th vol. of
Gesch. der roemischen Litt., Karlsruhe, 1837; a new ed. of the
first portion, 1872); SCHANZ, Gesch. der roem. Litt., Part III
(Munich, 1896), 117-324; EBERT, Gech. der
christlich-lateinischen Litt. (Leipzig, 1874; 2nd ed., 1889);
Anciennes litteratunes chretiennes (in Bibliotheque de
l'enseignement de l'hist. eccl., Paris): I; BATIFFOL, La
litterature grecque, a useful sketch (4th ed., 1908), II; DUVAL,
La litterature syriaque (3rd ed., 1908); LECLERCQ, L'Afrique
chretienne (in same Bibl. de l'ens. da l'h. eccl., 2nd ed.,
Paris, 1904); IDEM, L'Espagne chretienne (2nd ed., 1906);
BATIFFOL, L'eglise naissante et le Catholicisme, a fine
apologetic account of the development of the Church, from the
witness of the Fathers of the first three centuries (Paris,
1909); of general histories the best is Ducesesrese, Hist.
ancienne eta tEglisa (2 vols. have appeared, Paris, 1906-7);
finally, the first place is being taken among histories of the
Fathers by a work to be completed in six volumes, BARDENHEWER,
Geschichte der altkirchlichen Litteratur (I, to A.D. 200,
Freiburg im Br., 1902; II, to A.D. 300, 1903). The following are
Protestant: NEWMAN, The Church of the Fathers (London, 1840,
etc.); DONALDSON, A critical history of Christian lit. . . . to
the Nicene Council: I; The Apostolic Fathers, II and III; The
Apologists (London, 1864-6 -- unsympathetic); BRICHY, The Age of
the Fathers (2 vols., London, 1903); ZOeCKLER, Gesch. der
theologischen Litt. (Patristik) (Noerdlingen, 1889); CRUTTWELL,
A Literary History of Early Christianity . . . Nicene Period (2
vols., London, 1893); KRUeGER, Gesch. der altchristlichen Litt,
in den ersten 3 Jahrh. (Freiburg im Br. and Leipzig, 1895-7);
tr. GILLET (New York, 1897) -- this is the beet modern German
Prot. history. The following consists of materials: A. HARNACK,
Gechichte der altchr. Litt, bis Eusebius, I, Die Ueberlieferung
(Leipzig, 1893; this vol. enumerates all the known works of each
writer, and all ancient references to them, and notices the
MSS.); II, 1 (1897), and II, 2 (1904), Die Chronologie,
discussing the date of each writing; the latter Greek period is
dealt with by KRUMBACHER, Geschichte der byzantinischen Litt.
527-1453 (2nd ed. with assistance from EHRHARD, Munich, 1897).
The following collected series of studies must be added: Textd
und Untersuschungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Litt.,
ed. VON GEBHARDT AND A. HARNAcK (1st series, 15 vols., Leipzig,
1883-97, 2nd series, Neue Folge, 14 vols., 1897-1907, in
progress) -- the editors are now HARNACK AND SCHMIDT; ROBINSON,
Texts and Studies (Cambridge, 1891 -- in progress); EHRHARD AND
MUeLLER, Strassburger theologische Studien (12 vols., Freiburg
im Br., 1894 -- in progress); EHRHARD AND KIRSCH, Forschungen
zur christl. Litt. und Dogmengeschichte (7 vols., Paderborn, in
progress); La Pensee chretienne (Paris, in progress); Studii e
Testi (Vatican press, in progress). Of histories of development
of dogma, HARNACK, Dogmengeschichte (3 vols., 3rd ed., 1894-7, a
new ed. is in the press; French tr., Paris, 1898; Engl. tr., 7
vols., Edinburgh, 1894-9), a very clever and rather "viewy"
work; LOOFS, Leitfaden zum Studium der D. G. (Halle, 1889; 3rd
ed., 1893); SEEBERG, Lehrb. der D. G. (2 vols., Erlangen, 1895),
conservative Protestant; IDEM, Grundriss der D. G. (1900; 2nd
ed., 1905), a smaller work: SCHWANE, Dogmengeschichte, Catholic
(2nd ed., 1892, etc.; French tr., Paris, 1903-4); BETHUNE-BAKER,
Introduction to early History of Doctrine (London, 1903);
TIXERONT, Histoire des Dogmas: I, La theologie anti-niceenne
(Paris, 1905 -- excellent); and others.
PHILOLOGICAL:-- On the common Greek of the early period see
MOULTON, Grammar of N. T. Greek: I, Prolegomena (3rd ed.,
Edinburgh, 1909), and references; on the literary Greek, A.D.
1-250, SCHMIDT, Den Atticismus von Dion. Hal. bis auf den
zweiten Philostratus (4 vols., Stuttgart, 1887-9); THUMB, Die
griechieche Sprache im Zeitalter des Hellenismus (Strasburg,
1901). Besides the Thesaurus of STEPHANUS (latest ed., 8 vols.,
fol., Paris, 1831-65) and lexicons of classical and Biblical
Greek, special dictionaries of later Greek are DU CANGE,
Glossarium ad scriptores mediae et infimae graecitatis (2 vols.,
Lyons, 1688, and new ed., Breslan, 1890-1); SOPHOCLES, Greek
Lexicon of the Roman and Byzantine Periods, 146-1100 (3rd ed.,
New York, 1888); words wanting in Stephanus and in Sophocles are
collected by KUMANUDES (S. A. Koumanoudes), Sunagoge lexeon
athesauriston en tois heggenikois lexikois (Athens, 1883);
general remarks on Byzantine Greek in KNUMBACHER, op. cit. On
patristic Latin, KOFFMANE, Gesch. des Kinchenlateins: I,
Entstehung . . . bis auf Augustinus-Hieronymus (Breslau,
1879-81); NORDEN, Die antika Kunstprosa (Leipzig, 1898), II;
there is an immense number of studies of the language of
particular Fathers [e.g. HOPPE on Tertullian (1897); WATSON
(1896) and BAYARD (1902) on Cyprian; GOELTZER on Jerome (1884);
REGNER on Augustine (1886), etc.], and indices latinitatis to
the volumes of the Vienna Corpus PP. latt.; TRAUBE, Quellen and
Untensuchungen zur lat. Phil. des Mittelalters, I (Munich,
1906); much will be found in Archiv fuer lat. Lexicographie, ed.
WOeLFFLIN (Munich, began 1884).
TRANSLATIONS:-- Library of the Fathers of the Holy Catholic
Church, translated by members of the English Ch. (by PUSEY,
NEWMAN, etc.), (45 vols., Oxford, 1832-). ROBERTS AND DONALDSON,
The Ante-Nicene Christian Library (24 vols., Edinburgh, 1866-72;
new ed. by COXE, Buffalo, 1884-6, with RICHARDSON's excellent
Bibliographical Synopsis as a Suppl., 1887); SCHAFF AND WAGE, A
Select Library of Nicene and post-Nicene Fathers of the Chr.
Ch., with good notes (14 vols., Buffalo and New York, 1886-90,
and 2nd series, 1900, in progress).
ENCYCLOPEDIAS AND DICTIONARIES:-- SUICER, Thesaurus
ecclesiasticus, a patribus graecis ordine alphabetico exhibens
quaecumqua phrases, ritus, dogmata, haereses et hujusmodi alia
spectant (2 vols., Amsterdam, 1682; again 1728; and Utrecht,
1746); HOFFMANNS, Bibliographisches Lexicon der gesammten Litt.
der Griechen (3 vols., 2nd ed., Leipzig, 1838-45); the articles
on early Fathers and heresies in the Encyclopadia Britannica
(8th ed.) are, many of them, by Harnack and still worth reading;
WETZER AND WELTE, Kirchenlex., ed. HERGENROeTHER, and then by
KAULEN and others, 12 vols., one vol. of index (Freiburg im Br.,
1882-1903); HERZOG, Realencylopaedie fuer prot. Theol. und
Kirche, 3rd ed. by HAUCK (21 vols., 1896-1908); VACANT AND
MANGENOT, Dict. de Theol. cath. (Paris, in progress); CABROL,
Dict. d'archeologie chr. et de liturgie (Paris, in progress);
BAUDRILLART, Dict. d'hist. at de geogr. ecclesiastiques (Paris,
in progress); SMITH AND WACE, A Dictionary of Christian
Biography, is very full and valuable (4 vols., London, 1877-87).
GENERAL BOOKS OF REFERENCE:-- ITTIG, De Bibliothecis et Catenis
Patrum, gives the contents of the older collections of Fathers
which were enumerated above (Leipzig, 1707); IDEM, Schediasma de
auctoribus qui de scriptoribus ecclesiasticis egerunt (Leipzig,
1711); DOWLING, Notitia scriptorum SS. PP. . . . quae in
collectionibus Anecdotorum post annum MDCC in lucem editis
continentur (a continuation of ITTIG's De Bibl. et Cat., Oxford,
1839); an admirable modern work is EHRHARD, Die alt christliche
Litt, und ihre Erforschung seit 1880: I, Allgemeine Uebersicht,
1880-4 (Freiburg im Br., 1894); II, Ante-Nicene lit., 1884-1900
(1900); the bibliographies in the works of HARNACK and of
BARDENHEWER (see above) are excellent; for Ante-Nicene period,
RICHARDSON, Bibliographical Synopsis (in extra vol. of
Ante-Nicene. Fathers, Buffalo, 1887); for the whole period.
CHEVALIER, Repertoire des sources historiques du moyen-age:
Bio-bibliographie, gives names of persons (2nd ed., Paris,
1905-07); Topo-bibliographie gives names of places and subjects
(2nd ed., Paris, 1894-1903); progress each year is recorded in
HOLTZMANN AND KRUeGER's Theologischer Jahresbericht from 1881;
KROLL AND GURLITT, Jahresbericht fuer kleseische
Alterthumewissenschaft (both Protestant); BIHLMEYER,
Hagiagraphischer Jahresbericht for 1904-6 (Kempten and Munich,
1908). A very complete bibliography appears quarterly in the
Revue d'hist. eccl. (Louvain, since 1900), with index at end of
year; in this publ. the names of all Reviews dealing with
patristic matters will be found.
JOHN CHAPMAN
Lawrence Arthur Faunt
Lawrence Arthur Faunt
A Jesuit theologian, b. 1554, d. at Wilna, Poland, 28 February,
1590-91. After two years at Merton College, Oxford (1568-70)
under the tuition of John Potts, a well-known Philosopher, he
went to the Jesuit college at Louvain where he took his B.A.
After some time spent in Paris he entered the University of
Munich under the patronage of Duke William of Bavaria,
proceeding M.A. The date of his entrance into the Society of
Jesus is disputed, some authorities giving 1570, others 1575,
the year in which he went to the English College, Rome, to
pursue his studies in theology. lt is certain, however, that on
the latter occasion he added Lawrence to his baptisal name,
Arthur. He was soon made professor of divinity and attracted the
favourable attention of Gregory XIII, who on the establishment
of the Jesuit college at Posen in 1581, appointed him rector. He
was also professor of Greek there for three years of moral
theology and controversy for nine more, are was held in highest
repute among both ecclesiastical and secular authorities. His
chief theological works are: "De Christi in terris Ecclesia,
quaenam et penes quos existat" (Posen, 1584.), "Coenae
Lutheranorum et Calvinistarum oppugnatio ac catholicae
Eucharitiae defensio" (Posen, 1586); "Apologia libri sui de
invocatione ac veneratione Sanctorum" (Cologne, 1589).
F.M. RUDGE
Charles-Claude Fauriel
Charles-Claude Fauriel
A historian, b. at St-Etienne, France, 27 October, 1772; d. at
Paris,15 July, 1844. He studied first at the Oratorian College
of Tournon, then at Lyons. He served in the army of the
Pyrenees-Orientales. Under the Directory Fouche, an
ex-Oratorian, attached him to his cabinet as private secret
secretary. Under the Empire, he refused office in order to
devote all his time to study. Fauriel adopted the new ideas of
the Philosophers and the principles of the Revolution, but
repudiated them in part in the later years of his life. He was
an intense worker and knew Greek, Latin, Italian, German,
English, Sanskrit, and Arabic. It was he who made the merits of
Ossian and Shakespeare known to the French public and spread in
France the knowledge of German literature, which had been
previously looked upon as unimportant. He was one of the first
to investigate Romance literature, and the originality of his
views in this direction soon popularized this new study. He also
gathered the remnants of the ancient Basque and Celtic
languages. The first works he published were a translation of
"La Partheneide" (Paris, 1811), an idyllic epic by the Danish
poet, Baggesen, and of the tragedy of his friend Manzoni, "ll
Conte di Carmagnola" (Paris, 1823). The numerous linguistic and
archaeological contributions which he wrote for various
magazines won for him a great reputation among scholars; it was
said of him that "he was the man of the nineteenth century who
put in circulation the most ideas, inaugurated the greatest
number of branches of study, and gathered the greatest number of
new results in historical science" (Revue des Deux Mondes, 15
Dec., 1853). The publication of the "Chants populaires de la
Grece moderne", text and translation (Paris, 1824-25), at a
moment when Greece was struggling for her independence, made him
known to the general public. In 1880 a chair of foreign
literature was created for him at the University of Paris. He
studied specially the Southern literatures and Provencal poetry.
His lectures were published after his death under the title of
"Histoire de la poesie provenc,ale" (3 vols, Paris, 1846). In
order to study more deeply the origins of French civilization he
wrote "Histoire de la Gaule meridionale sous la domination des
conquerants germains" (4 vols., Paris, 1836), only a part of a
vaster work conceived by him. The merit of these works caused
him to be elected (1836), the Academy of Inscriptions and
Belles-Lettres. He contributed also to the "Histoire Litteraire
de la France", commenced by the Benedictines and taken after the
Revolution by the Institute of France. Having been named
assistant curator of the manuscript of Royal Library he
published an historical poem in Provencal verse (with a
translation and introduction), dealing with the crusade against
the Albigenses.
LOUIS N. DELAMARRE
Sts. Faustinus and Jovita
Sts. Faustinus and Jovita
Martyrs, members of a noble family of Brescia; the elder
brother, Faustinus, being a priest, the younger, a deacon. For
their fearless preaching of the Gospel, they were arraigned
before the Emperor Hadrian, who, first at Brescia, later at Rome
and Naples, subjected them to frightful torments, after which
they were beheaded at Bescia in the year 120, according to the
Bollandists, though Allard (Histoire des Persecutions pendant
les Deux Premiers Siecles, Paris, 1885) places the date as early
as 118. The many "Acts" of these saints are chiefly of a
legendary character. Fedele Savio, S.J. the most recent writer
on the subject, calls in question nearly every fact related of
them except their existince and martyrdom, which are too well
attested by their inclusion in so many of the early
martyrologies and their extraordinary cult in their native city,
of which from time immemorial they have been the chief patrons.
Rome, Bologna and Verona share with Brescia the possession of
their relics. Their feast is celebrated on 15 February, the
traditional date of their martyrdom.
JOHN F.X. MURPHY
Faustus of Riez
Faustus of Riez
Bishop of Riez (Rhegium) in Southern Gaul (Provence), the best
known and most distinguished defender of Semipelagianism, b.
between 405 and 410, and according to his contemporaries, Avitus
of Vienne and Sidonius Apollinaris, in the island of Britain; d.
between 490 and 495. Nothing, however, is known about his early
life or his education. He is thought by some to have been a
lawyer but owing to the influence of his mother, famed for her
sanctity, he abandoned secular pursuits while still a young man
and entered the monastery of Lerins. Here he was soon ordained
to the priesthood and because of his extraordinary piety was
chosen (432) to be head of the monastery, in succession to
Maximus who had become Bishop of Riez. His career as abbot
lasted about twenty or twenty-five years during which he
attained a high reputation for his wonderful gifts as an
extempore preacher and for his stern asceticism. After the death
of Maximus he became Bishop of Riez. This elevation did not make
any change in his manner of life; he continued his ascetic
practices, and frequently returned to the monastery of Lerins to
renew his fervour. He was a zealous advocate of monasticism and
established many monasteries in his diocese. In spite of his
activity in the discharge of his duties as bishop, he
participated in all the theological discussions of his time and
became known as a stern opponent of Arianism in all its forms.
For this, and also, it is said, for his view, stated below, of
the corporeity of the human soul, he incurred the enmity of
Euric, King of the Visigoths, who had gained possession of a
large portion of Southern Gaul, and was banished from his see.
His exile lasted eight years, during which time he was aided by
loyal friends. On the death of Euric he resumed his labours at
the head of his diocese and continued there until his death.
Throughout his life Faustus was an uncompromising adversary of
Pelagius, whom he styled Pestifer, and equally decided in his
opposition to the doctrine of Predestination which he styled
"erroneous, blasphemous, heathen, fatalistic, and conducive to
immorality". This doctrine in its most repulsive form had been
expounded by a presbyter named Lucidus and was condemned by two
synods, Arles and Lyons (475). At the request of the bishops who
composed these synods, and especially Leontius of Arles, Faustus
wrote a work, "Libri duo de Gratia Dei et humanae mentis libero
arbitrio", in which he refuted not only the doctrines of the
Predestinarians but also those of Pelagius (P.L., LVIII, 783).
The work was marred, however, by its decided Semipelagianism,
for several years was bitterly attacked, and was condemned by
the Synod of Orange in 529 (Denzinger, Enchiridion, Freiburg,
1908, no. 174 sqq. - old no. 144; PL.L., XLV, 1785; Mansi, VIII,
712). Besides this error, Faustus maintained that the human soul
is in a certain sense corporeal, God alone being a pure spirit.
The opposition to Faustus was not fully developed in his
lifetime and he died with a well-merited reputation for
sanctity. His own flock considered him a saint and erected a
basilica in his honour. Faustus wrote also: "Libri duo de
Spiritu Sancto" (P.L., LXII, 9), wrongly ascribed to the Roman
deacon Paschasius. His "Libellus parvus adversus Arianos et
Macedonianos", mentioned by Genadius, seems to have perished.
His correspondence (epistulae) and sermons are best found in the
new and excellent edition of the works of Faustus by
Engelbrecht, "Fausti Reiensis praeter sermones pseudo-Eusebianos
opera. Accedunt Ruricii Epistulae" in "Corpus Scrip. eccles.
lat.", vol. XXI (Vienna, 1891).
PATRICK J. HEALY
Faversham Abbey
Faversham Abbey
A former Benedictine monastery of the Cluniac Congregation
situated in the County of Kent about nine miles west of
Canterbury. It was founded about 1147 by King Stephen and his
Queen Matilda. Clarimbald, the prior of Bermondsey, and twelve
other monks of the same abbey were transferred to Faversham to
form the new community; Clarimbald was appointed abbot. It was
dedicated to Our Saviour and endowed with the manor of
Faversham. In the church, which was completed about 1251,
Stephen and Matilda, the founders, were buried and also their
eldest son Eustace Earl of Boulogne. We read of chapels in the
church dedicated to Our Lady and St. Anne. Henry II confirmed
all grants and privileges conferred by Stephen, adding others to
them, and all these were again confirmed to the monks by Kings
John and Henry III. The abbots had their seat in Parliament and
we find them in attendance at thirteen several parliaments
during the reigns of Edward and Edward II, but on account of
their reduced state and poverty, they ceased to attend after the
18th, Edward II. It appears that some bitterness existed for a
considerable time between the monks and the people of Faversham,
who complained of the abbey's imposts and exactions. Among these
grievances were claims, by way of composition, for allowing the
inhabitants to send their swine to pannage, for exposing their
goods for sale in the market, and for the liberty of brewing
beer. Twenty-two abbots are known to us; the last was John
Shepey, alias Castelocke, who, on 10 December, 1534, along with
the sacristan and four monks, is said to have signed the Act of
Supremacy. On 8 July, 1538, the abbey was surrendered to the
king, at which time the annual revenue was about -L-350. Henry
VIII gave the house and site to John Wheler for twenty-one years
at an annual rent of -L-3 18s. 8d. Afterwards the property came
into the possession of Sir Thomas Cheney, warden of the Cinque
Ports. Later it was owned by Thomas Ardern and subsequently came
to belong to the family of Sondes. The two entrance gates where
standing a century ago, but had to be taken down on account of
their ruinous condition. At the present day there is nothing
left except some portions of the outer walls.
G.E. HIND
Herve-Auguste-Etienne-Albans Faye
Herve-Auguste-Etienne-Albans Faye
An astronomer, b. at Saint-Benoit-du-Sault (Indre, France),
Oct., 1814; d. at Paris, 4 July, 1902. The son of a civil
engineer he entered the Ecole Polytechnique in 1832 to prepare
for a similar career. He left the school before the end of the
second year and went to Holland. In 1836 he entered the Paris
Observatory as a pupil. There, in 1843, he discovered the
periodic comet bearing his name. This discovery gained for him
the Prix Lalande. As early as 1847 he was elected member of the
Academy of Sciences. From 1848 to 1854 he taught geodesy at the
Ecole Polytechnique and then went to Nancy as rector of the
academy and professor of astronomy. In 1873 he was called to
succeed Delaunay in the chair of astronomy at the Ecole
Polytechnique, where he worked and lectured until 1893. He held
other official positions: inspector-general of secondary
education (1857); member (1862) and later (1876) president of
the Bureau des Longitudes; for a few weeks only, the minister of
public instruction (1877); and member of the superior council of
public instruction (1892). Chevalier of the Legion of Honour in
1843, he became officer in 1855 and commander in 1870. He was
honoured with other decorations and by election to the
membership of the principal European academies and societies.
Faye's fame rests both on his practical and on his theoretical
work. He improved the methods of astronomical measurement,
invented the zenithal collimator, suggested and applied
photography and electricity to astronomy, and dealt with
problems of physical astronomy, the shape of comets, the spots
of the sun, meteors, etc. Credit is given by him as well as by
his friends to the great influence of his wife, whom he met on
his early trip to Holland. His religious nature finds
corroboration in his knowledge of the wonders of the Universe.
Caeli enarrant gloriam Dei, he quotes in "Sur l'origine du
Monde" and goes on to say: "We run no risk of deceiving
ourselves in considering it [Superior Intelligence] the author
of all things, in refering to it those splendours of the heavens
which aroused our thoughts: and finally we are ready to
understand and accept the traditional formula: God, Father
Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth". He contributed over 400
memoires and notes to the "Comptes rendus, the Bulletin de la
societe astronomique", "Monthly Notices of the R.A.S." and
"Astronomische Nachrichen". His larger works are: "Cours
d'astronomie de l'ecole polytechnique" (Paris, 1883); Humbolt's
"Cosmos", tr. by Faye and Galusky (Paris, 1848-59); "Cours
d'astronomie nautique". (Paris, 1880); "Sur l'origine du monde"
(Paris, 1885).
WILLIAM FOX
Fear (In Canon Law)
Fear
(IN CANON LAW.)
A mental disturbance caused by the perception of instant or
future danger. Since fear, in greater or less degree, diminishes
freedom of action, contracts entered into through fear may be
judged invalid; similarly fear sometimes excuses from the
application of the law in a particular case; it also excuses
from the penalty attached to an act contrary to the law. The
cause of fear is found in oneself or in a natural cause
(intrinsic fear) or it is found in another person (extrinsic
fear). Fear may be grave, such for instance as would influence a
steadfast man, or it may be slight, such as would affect a
person of weak will. In order that fear may be considered grave
certain conditions are requisite: the fear must be grave in
itself, and not merely in the estimation of the person fearing;
it must be based on a reasonable foundation; the threats must be
possible of execution; the execution of the threats must be
inevitable. Fear, again, is either just or unjust, according to
the justness or otherwise of the reasons which lead to the use
of fear as a compelling force. Reverential fear is that which
may exist between Superiors and their subjects. Grave fear
diminishes willpower but cannot be said to totally take it away,
except in some very exceptional cases. Slight fear (metus levis)
is not considered even to diminish the will power, hence the
legal expression "Foolish fear is not a just excuse".
The following cases may be taken as examples to illustrate the
manner in which fear affects contracts, marriage, vows, etc.,
made under its influence. Grave fear excuses from the law and
the censure attached thereto, if the law is ecclesiastical and
if its non-observance will not militate against the public good,
the Faith, or the authority of the Church; but if there is
question of the natural law, fear excuses only from the censure
(Commentators on Decretals, tit. "De his quae vi metusve causa
fiunt"; Schmalzgrueber tit. "De sent. excomm." n. 79). Fear that
is grave extrinsic, unjust, and inflicted with a view to forcing
consent is nullifies a marriage contract, but not if the fear be
only intrinsic. The burden of proof lies with the person who
claims to have acted through fear. Reverential fear, if it be
also extrinsic, i.e., accompanied by blows, threats, or strong
entreaty, and aimed at extorting consent, will also invalidate
marriage. Qualified as just stated, fear is a diriment
impediment of marriage when coupled with violence or threats
(vis et metus). For further details see any manual of Canon Law
e.g. Santi-Leitner, "Praelect. Jur. Can." (Ratisbon, 1905) IV,
56-59; Heiner "Kathol. Eherecht" (Muster, 1905), 82-46; also
Ploch, "De Matr. vi ac metu contracto" (1853). For the history
of this impediment see Esmein "Le mariage en droit canonique"
(Paris, 1891), I, 309; II, 252; also Freisen, "Gesch. des kanon.
Eherechts etc." (Tuebingen, 1888).
Resignation of office extorted by unjust fear is generally
considered to be valid, but may be rescinded unless the
resignation has been confirmed by oath. On the other hand, if
fear has been justly brought to bear upon a person, the
resignation holds good (S. Cong. Conc. 24 April, 1880).
Ordination received under grave and unjust fear is valid, but
the obligations of the order are not contracted unless there is
subsequent spontaneous acceptance of the obligation (Sanchez, De
matrim.", VII, Disp. xxix, n. 5). In each cases if freedom is
desired the Holy See should be petitioned for a dispensation (S.
Cong. Conc. 13 Aug., 1870). The same holds good with regard to
the vows of religious profession, and all other vows made under
the influence of fear which is grave, extrinsic, unjust or
reverential (see Vow). In English law, on proof of force and
fear, the law restores the parties to the contract to the
position in which they were before it was entered into, and will
find the constraining party able to damages as reparation for
any injury done to the party constrained. The maxim of the
common law that "What otherwise would be good and just, if
sought by force or fraud becomes bad and unjust."
See CONSENT; CONTRACT; VIOLENCE.
DAVID DUNFORD
Fear (From a Moral Standpoint)
Fear
(CONSIDERED FROM A MORAL STANDPOINT.)
Fear is an unsettlement of soul consequent upon the apprehension
of some present or future danger. It is here viewed from the
moral standpoint, that is, in so far as it is a factor to be
reckoned with in pronouncing upon the freedom of human acts, as
well as offering an adequate excuse for failing to comply with
positive law, particularly if the law be of human origin.
Lastly, it is here considered in so far as it impugns or leaves
intact, in the court of conscience, and without regard to
explicit enactment, the validity of certain deliberate
engagements or contracts. The division of fear most commonly in
vogue among theologians is that by which they distinguish
serious fear (metus gravis) and trifling fear (fetus levis). The
first is such as grows out of the discernment of some formidable
impending peril: if this be really, and without qualification,
of large proportions, then the fear is said to be absolutely
great; otherwise it is only relatively so, as for instance, when
account is taken of the greater susceptibility of certain
classes of persons, such as old men, women, and children.
Trifling fear is that which arises from being confronted with
harm of inconsiderable dimensions, or, at any rate of whose
happening there is only a slender likelihood.
It is customary also to note a fear in which the element of
reverence is uppermost (metus reverensalis), which has its
source in the desire not to offend one's parents and superiors.
In itself this is reputed to be but trifling, although from
circumstances it may easily rise to the dignity of a serious
dread. A criterion rather uniformly employed by moralists, to
determine what really and apart from subjective conditions is, a
serious fear, is that contained in this assertion. It is the
feeling which is calculated to influence a solidly balanced man
(cadere in virum constantem). Another important classification
is that of fear which comes from some source within the person,
for example, that which is created by the knowledge that one has
contracted a fatal disease fear which comes from without, or is
produced namely, by some cause extrinsic to the terror-stricken
subject. In the last named instance the cause may be either
natural, such as probable volcanic eruptions, or recognizable in
the attitude of some free agent. Finally it may be observed that
one may have been submitted to the spell of fear either justly
or unjustly, according as the one who provokes this passion
remains within his rights, or exceeds them, in so doing. Actions
done under stress of fear, unless of course it be so intense as
to have dethroned reason, are accounted the legitimate progeny
of the human will, or are, as the theologians say, simply
voluntary, and therefore imputable. The reason is obvious, such
acts lack neither adequate advertence nor sufficient consent,
even though the latter be elicited only to avoid a greater evil
or one conceived to be greater. In asmuch, however, as they are
accompanied by a more or less vehement repugnance, they are said
to be in a limited and partial sense involuntary.
The practical inference from this teaching is that an evil act
having otherwise the bad eminence of grievous sin remains such,
even though done out of serious fear. This is true when the
transgression in question is against the natural law. In the
case of obligations emerging from positive precepts, whether
Divine or human, a serious and well-founded dread may often
operate as an excuse, so that the failure to comply with the law
under such circumstances is not regarded as sinful. The lawgiver
is not presumed to have it in mind to impose an heroic act.
This, however, does not hold good when the catering to such a
fear would involve considerable damage to the common weal. Thus,
for instance, a parish priest, in a parish visited by a
pestilence, is bound by the law of residence to stay at his
post, no matter what his apprehensions may be. It ought to be
added here that attrition, or sorrow for sin even though it be
the fruit of dread inspired by the thought of eternal
punishment, is not in any sense involuntary. At least it must
not be so, if it is to avail in the Sacrament of Penance for the
justification of the sinner. The end aimed at by this imperfect
sort of sorrow is precisely a change of will, and the giving up
of sinful attachment is an unreservedly good and reasonable
thing. Hence there is no room for that concomitant regret, or
dislike, with which other things are done through fear.
It is, of course, needless to observe that in what has been said
hitherto we have been referring always to what is done as a
result of fear, not to what takes place merely in, or with fear.
A vow taken out of fear produced by natural causes, such as a
threatened shipwreck, is valid; but one extorted as the effect
of fear unjustly applied by another is invalid; and this last is
probably true even when the fear is trifling, if it be the
sufficient motive for making the vow. The reason is that it is
difficult to conceive such a promise being acceptable to
Almighty God. So far as natural law is concerned, fear does not
invalidate contracts. Nevertheless, when one of the parties has
suffered duress at the hands of the other; the contract is
voidable within the choosing of the one so injured. As to
marriage, unless the fear prompting its solemnization is so
extreme as to take away the use of reason, the common teaching
is that such consent, having regard for the moment only to the
natural law, would be binding. Its standing in ecclesiastical
law is discussed in another article. It is worthy of note that
mere insensibility to fear having its root whether in stolidity,
or pride, or want of a proper rating of even temporal things, is
not a valuable character asset. On the contrary, it represents a
vicious temper of soul, and upon occasion its product may be
notably sinful.
JOSEPH F. DELANY
Ecclesiastical Feasts
Ecclesiastical Feasts
(Lat. Festum; Gr. heorte).
Feast Days, or Holy Days, are days which are celebrated in
commemoration of the sacred mysteries and events recorded in the
history of our redemption, in memory of the Virgin Mother of
Christ, or of His apostles, martyrs, and saints, by special
services and rest from work. A feast not only commemorates an
event or person, but also serves to excite the spiritual life by
reminding us of the event it commemorates. At certain hours
Jesus Christ invites us to His vineyard (Matt., xx, 1-15); He is
born in our hearts at Christmas; on Good Friday we nail
ourselves to the cross with Him; at Easter we rise from the tomb
of sin; and at Pentecost we receive the gifts of the Holy Ghost.
Every religion has its feasts, but none has such a rich and
judiciously constructed system of festive seasons as the
Catholic Church. The succession of these seasons form the
ecclesiastical year, in which the feasts of Our Lord form the
ground and framework, the feasts of the Blessed Virgin and the
Saints the ornamental tracery.
Prototypes and starting-points for the oldest ecclesiastical
feasts are the Jewish solemnities of Easter and Pentecost.
Together with the weekly Lord's Day, they remained the only
universal Christian feasts down to the third century
(Tertullian, "De Bapt." 19: Origen, "Contra Celsum", VIII, 22).
Two feasts of Our Lord (Epiphany, Christmas) were added in the
fourth century; then came the feasts of the Apostles and
martyrs, in particular provinces; later on also those of some
confessors (St. Martin, St. Gregory); in the sixth and seventh
centuries feasts of the Blessed Virgin were added. After the
triumph of Christianity, in the fourth and fifth centuries, the
sessions of the civil courts were prohibited on all feasts, also
the games in the circus and theatrical performances, in order to
give an opportunity to all to hear Mass. In the course of
centuries the ecclesiastical calendar expanded considerably,
because in earlier ages every bishop had a right to establish
new feasts. Later on a reduction of feasts took place, partly by
regular ecclesiastical legislation, partly in consequence of
revolutions in State and church. The Statutes of Bishop
Sonnatius of Reims (see CALENDAR, III, 163), in 620, mention
eleven feasts; the Statutes of St. Boniface ("Statuta", Mansi
XII, 383), nineteen days, "in quibus sabbatizandum", i.e. days
of rest. In England (ninth century) the feasts were confined to
Christmas, Epiphany, three days of Easter, Assumption, Sts.
Peter and Paul, St. Gregory, and All Saints. Before the reign of
King Edgar (959-75), three festivals of the B.V. Mary, and the
days kept in honour of the Apostles were added; in the tenth
year of Ethelred (989), the feast of St. Edward the Martyr (18
March), and in the reign of Canute, or Cnut (1017-35), that of
St. Dunstan (19 May), were added. The feasts in the Statutes of
Lanfrane (d. 1089) are quite numerous, and are divided into
three classes (Migne, P.L., CL, 472-78)
The Decree of Gratian (about 1150) mentions forty-one feasts
besides the diocesan patronal celebrations; the Decretals of
Gregory IX (about 1233) mention forty-five public feasts and
Holy Days, which means eighty-five days when no work could be
done and ninety-five days when no court sessions could be held.
In many provinces eight days after Easter, in some also the week
after Pentecost (or at least four days), had the sabbath rest.
From the thirteenth to the eighteenth century there were
dioceses in which the Holy Days and Sundays amounted to over one
hundred, not counting the feasts of particular monasteries and
churches. In the Byzantine empire there were sixty-six entire
Holy Days (Constitution of Manuel Comnenus, in 1166), exclusive
of Sundays, and twenty-seven half Holy Days. In the fifteenth
century, Gerson, Nicolas de Clemanges and others protested
against the multiplication of feasts, as an oppression of the
poor, and proximate occasions of excesses. The long needed
reduction of feast days was made by Urban VIII (Universa per
orbem, 13 Sept., 1642). There remained thirty-six feasts or
eighty-five days free from labour. Pope Urban limited the right
of the bishops to establish new Holy Days; this right is now not
abrograted, but antiquated. A reduction for Spain by Benedict
XIII (1727) retained only seventeen feasts; and on the nineteen
abrogated Holy Days only the hearing of Mass was obligatory.
This reduction was extended (1748) to Sicily. For Austria (1745)
the number had been reduced to fifteen full Holy Days; but since
the hearing of Mass on the abrogated feasts, or half Holy Days,
the fast on the vigils of the Apostles were poorly observed,
Clement XIV ordered that sixteen full feasts should be observed;
he did away with the half Holy Days, which however continued to
be observed in the rural districts (peasant Holy Days,
Bauernfeiertage). The parish priests have to say Mass for the
people on all the abrogated feasts. The same reduction was
introduced into Bavaria in 1775, and into Spain in 1791; finally
Pius VI extended this provision to other countries and
provinces.
By the French revolution the ecclesiastical calendar had been
radically abolished, and at the reorganization of the French
Church, in 1806, only four feasts were retained: Christmas, the
Ascension, the Assumption, and All Saints; the other feasts were
transferred to Sunday. This reduction was valid also in Belgium
and in Germany on the left bank of the Rhine. For the Catholics
in England Pius VI (19 March, 1777) established the following
lists of feasts: Easter and Pentecost two days each, Christmas,
New Year's Day, Epiphany, Ascension, Corpus Christi,
Annunciation, Assumption, Sts. Peter and Paul, St. George, and
All Saints. After the restoration of the hierarchy (1850), the
Annunciation, St. George, and the Monday after Easter and
Pentecost were abolished. Scotland keeps also the feast of St.
Andrew, Ireland the feasts of St. Patrick and the Annunciation.
In the United States, the number of feasts was not everywhere
the same; the Council of Baltimore wanted only four feasts, but
the decree was not approved by Rome; the third Plenary Council
of Baltimore (1884), by a general law, retained six feasts:
Christmas, New Year's Day, Ascension, Assumption, the Immaculate
Conception, and All Saints. Sts. Peter and Paul and Corpus
Christi were transferred to the next following Sunday. In the
city of Rome the following feasts are of double precept (i.e.
hearing Mass, and rest from work): Christmas, New Year's Day,
Epiphany, Purification, St. Joseph, Annunciation, Ascension, St.
Philip Neri (26 May), Corpus Christi, Nativity of the B.V.M.,
All Saints, Conception of the B.V.M., St. John the Evangelist.
The civil law in Italy acknowledges: Epiphany, Ascension, Sts.
Peter and Paul, Assumption, Nativity, Conception, Christmas, and
the patronal feasts.
The Greek Church at present observes the following Holy Days:
Nativity of Mary, Exaltation of the Cross (14 Sept.), St.
Demetrius (26 Oct.), St. Michael (8 Nov.), Entrance of Mary into
the Temple (21 Nov.), St. Nicholas (6 Dec.), Conception of St.
Anne (9 Dec.), Nativity of Christ, Commemoration of Mary (26
Dec.), St. Stephen (27 Dec.), Circumcision (1 Jan.), Epiphany,
the Doctors St. Basil, St. Gregory, St. John Chrysostom (30
Jan.), the Meeting of Christ and Simeon (2 Febr.), Annunciation,
St. George (23 Apr.), Nativity of St. John, Sts. Peter and Paul,
St. Elias (20 July), Transfiguration (6 Aug.), Assumption,
Beheading of St. John (29 Aug.), the Monday after Easter and
Pentecost, Ascension of Christ, and the patronal feasts. The
Russians have only nine ecclesiastical Holy Days which do not
fall on a Sunday, viz.: Nativity, Epiphany, Ascension,
Transfiguration, Purification, Annunciation, Assumption,
Presentation of Mary (21 Nov.), and the Exaltation of the Cross.
But they have fifty festivals (birthdays, etc.) of the imperial
family, on which days not even a funeral can be held.
DIVISION OF FEASTS
Feasts are divided:
+ According to external celebration (feriatio): festa fori, or
feasts of precept, with double obligation, to rest from work
and to hear Mass; festa chori, which are kept only in the
liturgy, by the celebration of Mass, and the recitation of the
Divine Office. Besides these there were, and still are, in
some dioceses (e.g. in Holland), the Half Holy Days, on which
the people after having heard Mass can do servile work
(Candlemas, Nativity of Mary, and the Immaculate Conception in
the Diocese of Utrecht).
+ According to extension: Universal feasts, celebrated
everywhere, at least in the Latin Church; particular feasts,
celebrated only by certain religious orders, countries,
provinces, dioceses or towns. These latter are either
prescribed by the general rubrics, like the patronal feasts,
or are specially approved by the Apostolic See, and prescribed
by bishops or synods, for particular countries or dioceses
(festa pro aliquibus locis in the Breviary). The universal
feasts are contained in the Roman Calendar.
+ According to their position in the calendar: movable feasts,
which always fall on a certain day of the week, depending on
the date of Easter, or the position of the Sunday, e.g.
Ascension of Christ (forty days after Easter), or the feast of
the Holy Rosary, the first Sunday of October; immovable
feasts, which are fixed to a certain date of the month, e.g.
Christmas, 25 December. In the Armenian Church all the feasts
of the year are moveable, except six: Epiphany, Purification
(14 Febr.), Annunciation (7 April), Nativity (8 Sept.),
Presentation (21 Nov.), and (8 Dec. Conception of Mary
(Tondini, "Calendrier liturgique de la Nation Armenienne",
Rome, 1906).
+ According to the solemnity of the office or rite (see CALENDAR
and DUPLEX). Since the thirteenth century there are three
kinds of feasts: festum simplex, semiduplex, and duplex, all
three regulated by the recitation of the Divine Office or
Breviary. The simple feast commences with the chapter
(capitulum) of First Vespers, and ends with None. It has three
lessons and takes the psalms of Matins from the ferial office;
the rest of the office is like the semidouble. The semidouble
feast has two Vespers, nine lessons in Matins, and ends with
Compline. The antiphons before the psalms are only intoned. In
the Mass, the semidouble has always at least three "orationes"
or prayers. On a double feast the antiphons are sung in their
entirety, before and after the psalms. In Lauds and Vespers
there are no suffragia of the saints, and the Mass has only
one "oratio" (if there be no commemoration prescribed). The
ordinary double feasts are called duplicia minora; occurring
with feasts of a higher rank, they can be simplified, except
the octave days of some feasts and the feasts of the Doctors
of the Church, which are transferred. The feasts of a higher
rank are the duplicia majora (introduced by Clement VIII), the
duplicia secundae classis and the duplicia primae classis.
Some of the latter two classes are kept with octaves. Before
the reformation of the Breviary by Pius V (1566-72), the terms
by which the solemnity of a feast could be known were, in many
churches, very different from the terms we use now. We give a
few examples from Grotefend, "Zeitrechnung", etc. (Hanover,
1891-98, II-III): Chur: "Festum summum, plenum officium trium
lectionum, commemoratio." Havelberg: "Festum summum,
semisummum, secundum, tertium, novem majus, novem minus,
compulsation 3 lect., antiphona." Halle: "Festum praepositi,
apostolicum, dominicale, 9 lect., compulsation 3 lect.,
antiphona." Breslau: "Festum Triplex, duplex, 9 lectionum, 3
lect., commemoratio." Carthusians: "Festum Candelarum,
capituli, 12 lect., missa, commemoratio." Lund: "Fest
Praelatorum, canonicorum, vicariorum, duplex, simplex, 9
lect., 3 lect., memoria."
Some of the religious orders which have their own breviary, did
not adopt the terms now used in the Roman Breviary. For example,
the Cistercians have the following terminology: "Festum sermonis
majus, sermonis minus, duarum missarum majus, 2 miss. minus, 12
lectionum, 3 lect., commemoratio." The Dominicans: "Totum
duplex, duplex, simplex, 3 lect., memoria." The Carmelites:
"Duplex majus I. classis solemnis, dupl, maj. I. cl. duplex
majus 2. classis, duplex minus I, classis, duplex minus 2,
classis, semiduplex, simplex, simplicissimum."
Among the feasts of the same rite there is a difference in
dignity. There are
+ primary feasts which commemorate the principal mysteries of
our religion, or celebrate the death of a saint;
+ secondary feasts, the object of which is a particular feature
of a mystery, e.g. the feast of the Crown of Thorns, of the
relics of a saint or of some miracle worked by him, e.g. the
feast of the translation of St. Stephen, the Apparition of Our
Lady of Guadalupe. The list of primary and secondary feasts
has been determined by a decree of the Sacred Congregation of
Rites (22 Aug., 1893), and is found in the introduction to the
Roman Breviary.
+ Within the two classes mentioned the feasts of Christ take the
first place, especially those with privileged vigils and
octaves (Christmas, Epiphany, Easter, Pentecost, and Corpus
Christi); then follow the feasts of the Blessed Virgin, the
Holy Angels, St. John the Baptist, St. Joseph, the Apostles
and Evangelists, and the other saints.
DUCHESNE, Origines du Culte Chretien (Paris, 1889); tr. McCLURE
(London, 1904); KELLNER, Heortology (tr. London, 1909), PROBST,
Liturgie des vierten Jahrh. (Muenster, 1893); BAeUMER,
Geschichte des Breviers (Freiburg, 1895); BENTRIUM,
Denkwuerdigen (Mainz, 1829); LINGARD, Antiquities of the Anglo
Saxon Church (London, 1858); MAXIMILIAN, PRINCE OF SAXONY,
Praelect. de Liturgiis Orientalibus (Freiburg, 1908);
Kirchliches Handlexicom (Muenster 1907);
Kirchenlexicon(Freiburg, 1886), IV; NILLES, Kalendarium,
manuele, etc. (Innsbruck,1897); MORISOT, Instructions sur les
fetes de l'annee (Paris, 1908).
F.G. HOLWECK
Febronianism
Febronianism
The politico-ecclesiastical system outlined by Johann Nikolaus
von Hontheim, Auxiliary Bishop of Trier, under the pseudonym
Justinus Febronius, in his work entitled "Justini Febronii Juris
consulti de Stata Ecclesiae et legitima potestate Romani
Pontificis Liber singularis ad reuniendos dissidentes in
religione christianos compositus" (Bullioni apud Guillelmum
Evrardi, 1763; in reality the work was published by Esslinger at
Frankfort-on-the-Main). Taking as a basis the Gallican
principles which he had imbibed from the canonist Van Espen
while pursuing his studies in Louvain, Hontheim advanced along
the same lines, in spite of many inconsistencies, to a
radicalism far outstripping traditional Gallicanism. He develops
in this work a theory of ecclesiastical organization founded on
a denial of the monarchical constitution of the Church. The
ostensible purpose was to facilitate the reconciliation of the
Protestant bodies with the Church by diminishing the power of
the Holy See.
According to Febronius (cap. i), the power of the keys was
entrusted by Christ to the whole body of the Church, which holds
it principaliter et radicaliter, but exercises it through her
prelates, to whom only the administration of this power is
committed. Among these the pope comes first, though even he is
subordinate to the Church as a whole. The Divine institution of
the primacy in the church is acknowledged (cap. ii), but
Febronius holds that its connexion with the Roman See does not
rest on the authority of Christ, but on that of Peter and the
Church, so that the Church has the power to attach it to another
see. The power of the pope, therefore, should be confined to
those essential rights inherent in the primacy which were
exercised by the Holy See during the first eight centuries. The
pope is the centre with which the individual Churches must be
united. He must be kept informed of what is taking place
everywhere throughout the Church, that he may exercise the care
demanded by his office for the preservation of unity. It is his
duty to enforce the observance of the canons in the whole
Church; he has the authority to promulgate laws in the name of
the Church, and to depute legates to exercise his authority as
primate. His power, as head of the whole Church, however, is of
an administrative and unifying character, rather than a power of
jurisdiction. But since the ninth century, chiefly through the
influence of the False Decretals of Pseudo-Isidore, the
constitution of the Church has undergone a complete
transformation, in that the papal authority has been extended
beyond proper bounds (cap. iii). By a violation of justice,
questions which at one time were left to the decision of
provincial synods and metropolitans gradually came to be
reserved to the Holy See (cap. iv), as, for instance, the
condemnation of heresies, the confirmation of episcopal
elections, the naming of coadjutors with the right of
succession, the transfer and removal of bishops, the
establishment of new dioceses, and the erection of metropolitan
and primatial sees. The pope, whose infallibility is expressly
denied (cap. v), cannot, on his own authority, without a council
or the assent of the entire episcopate, give forth any decisions
on matters of faith of universal obligation. Likewise in matters
of discipline, he can issue no decrees affecting the whole body
of the faithful; the decrees of a general council have binding
power only after their acceptance by the individual churches.
Laws once promulgated cannot be altered at the pope's will or
pleasure. It is also denied that the pope, by the nature and
authority of the primacy, can receive appeals from the whole
Church.
According to Febronius, the final court of appeal in the Church
is the ecumenical council (cap. vi), the fights of which exclude
the pretended monarchical constitution of the Church. The pope
is subordinate to the general council; he has neither the
exclusive authority to summon one, nor the right to preside at
its sessions, and the conciliar decrees do not need his
ratification. Ecumenical councils are of absolute necessity, as
even the assent of a majority of bishops to a papal decree, if
given by the individuals, outside a council, does not constitute
a final, irrevocable decision. Appeal from the pope to a general
council is justified by the superiority of the council over the
pope. According to the Divine institution of the episcopate
(cap. vii), all bishops have equal rights; they do not receive
their power of jurisdiction from the Holy See. It is not within
the province of the pope to exercise ordinary episcopal
functions in dioceses other than that of Rome. The papal
reservations regarding the granting of benefices, annates, and
the exemption of religious orders are thus in conflict with the
primitive law of the Church, and must be abolished. Having
shown, as he believes, that the existing ecclesiastical law with
reference to papal power is a distortion of the original
constitution of the Church, due chiefly to the False Decretals,
Febronius demands that the primitive discipline, as outlined by
him, be everywhere restored (cap. viii). He then suggests as
means for bringing about this reformation (cap. ix), that the
people shall be properly enlightened on this subject, that a
general council with full freedom be held, that national synods
be convened, but especially that Catholic rulers take concerted
action, with the cooperation and advice of the bishops, that
secular princes avail themselves of the Regium Placet to resist
decrees, that obedience be openly refused to a legitimate
extent, and finally that secular authority be appealed to
through the Appellatio ab abusu. The last measures reveal the
real trend of Febronian principles; Febronius, while ostensibly
contending for a larger independence and greater authority for
the bishops, seeks only to render the Churches of the different
countries less dependent on the Holy See, in order to facilitate
the establishment of national Churches in these states, and
reduce the bishops to a condition in which they would be merely
servile creatures of the civil power. Wherever an attempt was
made to put his ideas into execution, it proceeded along these
lines.
The book was formally condemned, 27 February, 1764, by Clement
XIII. By a Brief of 21 May, 1764, the pope required the German
episcopate to suppress the work. Ten prelates, among them the
Elector of Trier, complied. Meanwhile no steps had been taken
against the author personally, who was well known in Rome.
Despite the ban of the Church, the book, harmonizing as it did
with the spirit of the times, had a tremendous success. A second
edition, revised and enlarged, was issued as early as 1765; it
was reprinted at Venice and Zurich, and translations appeared in
German, French, Italian, Spanish, and Portuguese. In the three
later volumes, which Hontheim issued as supplementary to the
original work, and numbered II to IV (Vol. II, Frankfort and
Leipzig, 1770; Vol. III, 1772; Vol. IV, Parts 1 and 2, 1773-74),
he defended it, under the name of Febronius and various other
pseudonyms, against a series of attacks. Later he published an
abridgment under the title: "Justinus Febronius abbreviatus et
emendatus" (Cologne and Frankfort, 1777). In addition to the
"Judicium academicum" of the University of Cologne (1765),
refutations appeared from a large number of Catholic authors,
the most important being: Ballerini, "De vi ac ratione primatus
Romanorum Pontificum et de ipsorum infallibilitate in
definiendis controversiis fidei" (Verona, 1766); Idem, "De
potestate ecclesiastica Summorum Pontifleum et Conciliorum
generalium liber, una cum vindiciis auctoritatis pontificiae
contra opus Just. Febronii (Verona, 1768; Augsburg, 1770; new
ed. of both works, Muenster in W., 1845, 1847); Zaccaria,
"Antifebronio, ossia apologia polemicostorica del primato del
Papa, contra la dannata opera di Giust. Febronio" (2 vols.,
Pesaro, 1767; 2nd ed., 4 vols., Cesena, 1768-70; tr. German,
Reichenberger, Augsburg, 1768); Idem, "Antifebronius vindicatus"
(4 vols., Cesena, 1771-2); Idem, "In tertium Justini Febronii
tomum animadversiones Romano-catholicae" (Rome, 1774); Mamachi,
"Epistolae ad Just. Febronium de ratione regendae christianae
reipublicae deque legitima Romani Pontificis potestate" (3
vols., Rome, 1776-78). There were, besides, refutations written
from the Protestant standpoint, to repudiate the idea that a
diminution of the papal power was all that was necessary to
bring the Protestants back into union with the Church, for
instance Karl Friedrich Bahrdt, "Dissertatio de eo, an fieri
possit, ut sublato Pontificio imperio reconcilientur Dissidentes
in religione Christiani" (Leipzig, 1763), and Johann Friedrich
Bahrdt, "Do Romana Ecclesia irreconciliabili" (Leipzig, 1767);
Karl Gottl. Hofmann, "Programma continens examen regulae
exegeticae ex Vincentio Lerinensi in Febronio repetitae"
(Wittenberg, 1768).
The first measures against the author were taken by Pius VI, who
urged Clemens Wenzeslaus, Elector of Trier, to prevail on
Hontheim to recall the work. Only after prolonged exertions, and
after a retractation, couched in general terms, had been
adjudged unsatisfactory in Rome, the elector forwarded to Rome
Hontheim's emended recantation (15 November, 1778). This was
communicated to the cardinals in consistory by Pius VI on
Christmas Day. That this retractation was not sincere on
Hontheim's part is evident from his subsequent movements. That
he had by no means relinguished his ideas appears from his
"Justini Febronii Jcti. Commentarius in suam Retractationem Pio
VI. Pont. Max. Kalendis Nov. anni 1778 submissam" (Frankfort,
1781; German ed., Augsburg, 1781), written for the purpose of
justifying his position before the public. Meanwhile;
notwithstanding the prohibition, the "Febronius" had produced
its pernicious effects, which were not checked by the
retractation. The ideas advanced in the work, being in thorough
accord with the absolutistic tendencies of civil rulers, were
eagerly accepted by the Catholic courts and governments of
France, the Austrian Netherlands, Spain and Portugal, Venice,
Austria, and Tuscany; and they received further development at
the hands of court theologians and canonists who favoured the
scheme of a national Church. Among the advocates of the theory
of Febronianism in Germany, mention should be made of the Trier
professor, Franz Anton Haubs, "Themata ex historia ecclesiastica
de hierarchia sacra primorum V saeculorum" (Trier, 1786);
"Systema primaevum de potestate episcopali ejusque applicatio ad
episcopalia quaedam jura in specie punctationibus I. II. et IV.
congressus Emsani exposita" (Trier, 1788); and Wilhelm Joseph
Castello, "Dissertatio historica de variis causis, queis
accidentalis Romani Pontificis potestas successive ampliata
fuit" (Trier, 1788). It was the Austrian canonists, however, who
contributed most towards the compilation of a new law code
regulating the relations of Church and State, which was reduced
to practice under Joseph II. Especially noteworthy as being
conceived in this spirit were the textbooks on canon law
prescribed for the Austrian universities, and compiled by Paul
Joseph von Riegger, "Institutiones juris ecclesiastici" (4
vols., Vienna, 1768-72; frequently reprinted), and Pehem,
"Praelectiones in jus ecclesiasticum universum", also, in a more
pronounced way, the work of Johann Valentin Eybel, "Introductia
in jus ecclesiasticum Catholicorum" (4 vols., Vienna, 1777;
placed on the Index, 1784).
The first attempt to give Febronian principles a practical
application was made in Germany at the Coblenz Conference of
1769, where the three ecclesiastical Electors of Mains, Cologne,
and Trier, through their delegates, and under the directions of
Hontheim, compiled a list of thirty grievances against the Roman
See, in consonance with the principles of the "Febronius"
(Gravamina trium Archiepiscoporum Electorum, Moguntinensis,
Trevirensis et Coloniensis contra Curiam Apostolicam anno 1769
ad Caesarem delata; printed in Le Bret, "Magazin zum Gebrauch
der Staaten- und Kirchengeschichte", Pt. VIII, Ulm, 1783, pp.
1-21). More significant was the Ems Congress of 1786, at which
the three ecclesiastical electors and the Prince-Bishop of
Salzburg, in imitation of the Coblenz Congress, and in
conformity with the basic principles of the "Febronius", made a
fresh attempt to readjust the relations of the German Church
with Rome, with a view to securing for the former a greater
measure of independence; they also had their representatives
draw up the Ems Punctation in twenty-three articles; they
achieved, however, no practical results. An attempt was made to
realize the principles of the "Febronius" on a large scale in
Austria, where under Joseph II a national Church was established
according to the plan outlined. Efforts in the same direction
were made by Joseph's brother Leopold in his Grand-Duchy of
Tuscany. The resolutions adopted at the Synod of Pistoia, under
Bishop Scipio Ricci, along these lines, were repudiated by the
majority of the bishops of the country.
MEJER, Febronius, Weihbischof Johann Nicolaus von Hontheim und
sein Widerruf (Tuebingen, 1880, 2nd ad., 1885), anti-Roman;
KUeNTZIGER, Febronius et le Febronianisme in Memoires couronnes
et autres memoires publies par l'Academie Royale des sciences,
des lettres et des beaux-arts de Belgique, Vol. XLIV (Brussels,
1891). also anti-Roman; STUeMPER. Die kirchenrechtlichen Ideen
des Febronius, inaugural dissertation presented to the faculty
of jurisprudence and political economy of the University of
Wuerzburg (Aschaffenburg, 1908), Catholic; ROeSCH, Das
Kirchenrecht im Zeitalter der Aufklaerung, I: Der Febronianismus
in Archiv f. kath. Kirchenrecht, LXXXIII (Mainz, 1903), 446-82,
620-52. Also WALCH, Neueste Religions-Geschichte, Pt. I (Lemgo,
1771), 145-98; Pt. VI (1777), 175-208; Pt. VII (1779), 193-240,
453-64; Pt. VIII (1781), 529-42; Briefwechsel zwischen weiland
ihrer Durchlaucht dam Herrn Kurfuersten von Trier, Clemens
Wenzeslaus und dem Herrn Weihbischof Nik. von Hontheim ueber das
Buch, Just. Febronii de statu Ecclesiae (Frankfort, 1813);
PHILLIPS, Kirchenrecht (Ratisbon, 1848), III, 365-74; MARX,
Gesch. des Erzstifts Trier (Trier, 1864), V, 90-129; BRUeCK, Die
rationalistischen Bestrebungen im katholischen Deutschland
(Mainz, 1865); da SCHULTE, Die Gesch. der Quellen und Lit. des
canonischen Rechts (Stuttgart, 1880), Vol. III, Pt. 1, 193-205;
BELLESHEIM in Historisch-politische Blaetter, LXXXVI (1880),
529-44; KRAUS in Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie, s. v. Hontheim;
BRUeCK in Kirchenlex., s. v. Hontheim; ANON., Netler, Hontheim
und Clemens Wenzeslaus (Die Anfaenge der febronianischen
Haeresie) in Katholik, I (1891), 537-57; II, 19-39; ZILLICH,
Febronius in Hallesche Abhandlungen zur neueren Geschichte, XLIV
(Halle, 1906).
FRIEDRICH LAUCHERT.
John de Feckenham
John de Feckenham
Last Abbot of Westminster, and confessor of the Faith; b. in
Feckenham Forest, Worcestershire, in 1515(?), of poor parents
named Howman; d. at Wisbech Castle, 16 Oct., 1585. He became a
Benedictine monk at Evesham, and studied at Gloucester Hall,
Oxford (B. D., 11 June, 1539), returned to Evesham to teach
junior monks till the dissolution, 27 Jan., 1540, when he
received a pension of 15 marks. Rector of Solihull,
Worcestershire (1544?-1554), he became known as an orator and
controversialist. He was domestic chaplain to Bishop Bell of
Worcester till 1543, and then to Bonner of London till 1549. He
was sent to the Tower by Cranmer for defending the Faith, but in
1551 was "borrowed out of prison" to hold public disputations
with the new men, e. g. with Jewel and Hooper. Again relegated
to the Tower, he was released by Queen Mary, 5 Sept., 1553, and
was much employed as a preacher in London; he was advanced to
benefices, and in March, 1554, made dean of St. Paul's. He
showed great mildness to the heretics, many of whom he
converted, and saved others from the stake. He prepared Lady
Jane Grey for death, though he could not convince her of her
errors, as he did Sir John Cheke, the king's tutor. Feckenham
interceded for Elizabeth after Wyatt's rebellion, obtaining her
life and subsequent release. He took the degree of D. D. at
Oxford, May, 1556, and on 7 Sept., 1556, was appointed abbot of
the royal Abbey of Westminster, restored to the order by the
queen. The Benedictines took possession on 21 November (since
known as dies memorabilis), and the abbot was installed on 29
November, beginning his rule over a community of about twenty-
eight, gathered from the dissolved abbeys. He successfully
defended in Parliament, 11 Feb., 1557, the threatened privileges
of sanctuary, and restored the shrine of the Confessor in his
abbey church.
Elizabeth at her accession offered (November, 1558) to preserve
the monastery if he and his monks would accept the new religion,
but Feckenham steadily refused, bravely and eloquently defending
the old Faith in Parliament and denouncing the sacrilegious
innovations of the Anglicans. He gave sanctuary to Bishop
Bonner, and quietly went on planting trees while awaiting the
expulsion, which took place 12 July, 1559. He generously
resigned a large part of the money due him to the dean who
succeeded him. Nevertheless, in May, 1560, he was sent to the
Tower "for railing against the changes that had been made".
Three years later he was given into the custody of Horne, the
intruded Bishop of Winchester, but in 1564 he was sent back to
the Tower, his episcopal jailer having failed to pervert him.
Feckenham himself said that he preferred the prison to the
pseudo-bishop's palace. In 1571 he prepared his fellow-prisoner,
Blessed John Storey, for death, and a little later was sent to
the Marshalsea. In the Tower he and his fellow-confessors had
been "haled by the arms to Church in violent measure, against
our wills, there to hear a sermon, not of persuading us but of
railing upon us." He was released on bail, 17 July, 1574, after
fourteen years' confinement, and lived in Holborn, where he
devoted himself to works of charity. He encouraged boys in manly
sports on Sundays, preferring that they should practise archery
rather than attend the heretical services. But falling ill, he
was permitted to go to Bath, where in 1576 he built a hospice
for poor patients and did much good. But his zeal for the Faith
excited fresh rancour, and in 1577 he was committed to the
custody of Cox, Bishop of Ely, who was requested to bring him to
conformity. Feckenham's so-called "Confession" (British Museum,
Lansdowne MSS., No. 30, fol. 199) shows how egregiously Cox
failed, and in 1580 he petitioned the council to remove the
abbot, who was accordingly sent to Wisbech Castle, a dismal
prison belonging to the Bishops of Ely, which he shared with
Watson, Bishop of Lincoln, and other confessors. Here he died a
holy death, fortified by the Sacred Viaticum, and was buried in
Wisbech Church. He was worn out by an imprisonment of twenty-
three years for conscience' sake; a striking example of
Elizabeth's ingratitude. Protestant writers unite in praising
his virtues, especially his kindness of heart, gentleness, and
charity to the poor. Even Burnet calls him "a charitable and
generous man". His best-known work is against Herne, "The
Declaration of such Scruples and Stays of Conscience touching
the Oath of Supremacy", etc. He also wrote "Caveat Emptor", a
caution against buying abbey lands, and a commentary on the
Psalms, but these are lost.
Most complete life in Taunton, English Black Monks of St.
Benedict (London, 1897); Bradley in Dict. Nat. Biog., s. v.,
with good bibliography; Wood, Athenae Oxon., II, 222; Weldon,
Chronological Notes on English Congregation O. S. B. (Stanbrook
Abbey, 1883); Gillow, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath., II; Gasquet, Last
Abbot of Glastonbury and other Essays (London, 1908), s. v.
Feckenham at Bath; Stapleton (vere Harpsfield), Counterblast to
Mr. Hornes vayne blaste against Mr. Feckenham (London, 1567);
Reyner, Apostolatus Benedictinorum in Anglia (Douai, 1626);
State Papers, Elizabeth, Domestic, XXII, XXXVI, CXIV, CXXXI,
CXXXII, CXLIII, etc.; Dixon, History of the Church of England
(London, 1891), IV, V.
Bede Camm
Johann Michael Feder
Johann Michael Feder
A German theologian, b. 25 May, 1753, at Oellingen in Bavaria;
d. 26 July, 1824, at Wuerzburg. He studied in the episcopal
seminary of Wuerzburg from 1772-1777; in the latter year he was
ordained priest and promoted to the licentiate in theology. For
several years Feder was chaplain of the Julius hospital; in 1785
he was appointed extraordinary professor of theology and
Oriental languages at the University of Wuerzburg; was created a
Doctor of Divinity in 1786; director of the university library
1791, ordinary professor of theology and censor of theological
publications, 1795. After the reorganization of the University
of Wuerzburg, 1803-4, he was appointed chief librarian,
resigning the professorship of theology in 1805. Shortly after
his removal from office as librarian, November, 1811, he
suffered a stroke of apoplexy, from which he never fully
recovered. Feder was a prolific writer, editor, and translator,
but was imbued with the liberal views of his time. His most
meritorious work is a revision of Dr. Heinrich Braun's German
translation of the Bible (1803), 2 vols. This revision served as
the basis for Dr. Allioli's well-known translation. He also
translated the writings of St. Cyril of Jerusalem (1786); the
sermons of St. Chrysostom on Matthew and John, in conjunction
with the unfortunate Eulogius Sehneider (1786-88); Theodoret's
ten discourses on Divine Providence (1788); Gerard's lectures on
pastoral duties (1803); de Bausset's life of Fenelon (1800-12),
3 vols., and the same author's life of Bossuet (1820); Fabert's
"Meditations" (1786). He was editor of the "Magazin zur
Befoerderung des Schulwesens" (1791-97), 3 vols., of the
"Prakt.-theol. Magazin fuer katholische Geistliche" (1798-1800),
and of the "Wuerzburger Gelehrten Anzeigen" (1788-92). He also
wrote several volumes of sermons.
ALEXIUS HOFFMANN
Rudolph William Basil Feilding
Rudolph William Basil Feilding
The eighth Earl of Denbigh, and ninth Earl of Desmond, b. 9
April, 1823; d. 1892. He was educated at Eton College and
Trinity College, Cambridge, where he took the degree of Master
of Arts. He was received into the Church in 1850, and took an
active part in many Catholic works of charity under Cardinal
Wiseman. As Viscount Feilding he was appointed honorary
treasurer, jointly with Viscount Campden and Mr. Archibald J.
Dunn, of the Peter's Pence Association. He was a man of great
courage and independence of character, qualities needed in the
middle of the nineteenth century when the English Protestant
mind was much inflamed in consequence of the establishment of
the Catholic hierarchy in England. As a thanksgiving for his
conversion, he built the Franciscan monastery at Pentasaph,
North Wales.
ARCHIBALD J. DUNN
Andreas Benedict Feilmoser
Andreas Benedict Feilmoser
A theologian and Biblical scholar, b. 8 April, 1777, at
Hopfgarten, Tyrol; d. at Tuebingen, 20 July, 1831, studied at
Salzburg from 1789 to 1794, took a two years' course in
philosophy at the University of Innsbruck (1794-96), and entered
the Benedictine Order at Fiecht, Tyrol, in September, 1796. At
this abbey he studied the Oriental languages under Dom Georg
Maurer, a monk of St. George's Abbey, Villingen. For his
theological studies he was sent to Villingen, where he again
heard Dom Maurer and Dom Gottfried Lumper, both eminent
scholars. Returning to Fiecht in 1800, he taught Biblical
exegesis and was ordained priest in 1801; late in the same year
he was appointed master of novices, in 1802 professor of
Christian ethics and in 1803 of ecclesiastical history. A number
of theses which he published in 1803 aroused the suspicions of
the ecclesiastical authorities of the Diocese of Brixen. The
Abbot of Fiecht was sharply rebuked for permitting Feilmoser to
teach unsound doctrine. In 1804 appeared Feilmoser's
"Animadversiones in historiam ecclesiasticam", which did not
meet the approval of the diocesan authorities, who threatened,
in case Feilmoser did not desist from advancing dangerous
opinions, to institute proceedings against the abbot. To
Feilmoser's request for a specification of the objectionable
passages in his writings no reply was made, but the entire
matter was reported to the emperor at Vienna. An investigation
instituted by order of the emperor resulted favourably for
Feilmoser. He was, nevertheless, removed from the office of
master of novices and in 1806 was made assistant in the parish
of Achenthal. By the Treaty of Presburg (26 Dec.,1805) Tyrol was
cut off from Austria and became a part of Bavaria. The new
Government, in November, 1806, appointed him professor of
Oriental languages and of introduction to the Old Testament at
the University of Innsbruck. The monastery of Fiecht having been
suppressed in 1807, he left the order. At lnnsbruck he received
the degree of Doctor of Theology in 1808 and was appointed to
the chair of New Testament exegesis. During the Tyrolese
insurrection, August, 1809, he, with a number of other
professors, was taken prisoner and carried to Pusterthal by
order of Andreas Hofer. In 1810 he returned to Innsbruck, in
1811 he was made professor of catechetics, in 1812 of Latin and
Greek philology, and in 1817 was reappointed professor of
New-Testament exegesis in the face of much opposition. About
this time the old charges against him were revived, and in 1818
he was bitterly attacked in an anonymous work published at
Augsburg. He was denied the opportunity of publicly defending
himself, inasmuch as the imperial censor at Vienna, on 17 July,
1819, decided that since the anonymous work was published, a
foreign country, it was under Austrian censure and must be
regarded as non-existent. On 25 April, 1820, he was formally
appointed a professor at the University of Tuebingen, where he
continued to teach New -Testament exegesis until his death.
He wrote: "Saetze aus der christlichen Sittenlehre fuer die
oeffentliche Pruefung in dem Benedictinerstifte zu Fiecht"
(Innsbruck, 1803); "Saetze aus der Einleitung in die Buecher des
alten Bundes und den hebraischen Alterhumern" (Innsbruch, 1803);
"Animaversiones in historiam ecclesiasticam" (Innsbruck, 1803);
"Saetze aus der Einleitung in die Buecher des neuen Bundes und
der bibli. Hermeneutik" (Innsbruck, 1804); "Einleitung in die
Buecher des des neuen Bundes" (Innsbruck, 1810); "Auszug des
hebr. Sprachlehre nach Jahn" (Innsburck 1812); "Die
Verketzerrungssucht" (Rottweil, 1820). His principal work,
"Einleitung in die Bucher des neuen Bundes", published in a
revised edition (Tuebingen, 1830), is inaccurate and was praised
far beyond its due. He also contributed papers and criticisms to
the "Annalen der osterreichischen Litteratur und Kunst" and the
"Theologische Quartal-schrift" of Tuebingen. His exegetical
writings are influenced by the rationalistic spirit of his day.
He denied the genuineness of the Comma Johanneum and maintained
that the Books of Job, Jonas, Tobias, and Judith are merely
didactic poems.
ALEXIUS HOFFMANN
Johann Ignaz von Felbiger
Johann Ignaz von Felbiger
A German educational reformer, pedagogical writer, and canon
regular of the Order of St. Augustine, b. 6 January, 1724, at
Gross-Glogau in Silesia; d. 17 May, 1788, at Presburg in
Hungary. He was the son of a postmaster, who had been ennobled
by Emperor Charles VI. The death of his parents constrained him,
after studying theology at the University of Breslau, to accept
(1744) the position of teacher in a private family. In 1746 he
joined the Order of Canons Regular of St. Augustine at Sagan in
Silesia, was ordained a priest in 1748, and ten years later
became abbot of the monastery of Sagan. Noting the sad condition
of the local Catholic schools, he strove to remedy the evil by
publishing his first school-ordinance in 1761. During the
private journey to Berlin, in 1762, he was favourably impressed
with Hecker's Realschule and Haehn's method of instructing by
initials and tables (Literal- or Tabellen-methode), and became
an enthusiastic propagator of this method. A school-ordinance
for the dependencies of the monastery of Sagan was issued in
1763, teachers' college was established, and Felbiger's school
reforms soon attracted the attention of Catholics and
Protestants alike. He was supported by the Silesian minister von
Schlabrendorff, and at the latter's request, after a second
journey to Berlin he elaborated general school-ordinance for the
Catholic elementary schools in Silesia (1765). Three graded
catechisms, the joint work of the prior and the abbot of Sagan,
appeared in 1766 under the title, "Silesian Catechism", and
enjoyed a wide circulation. The death of von Schlabrendorff in
1769 marked the end of the Silesian government's educational
efforts. Felbiger's suggetions were heeded, however, by King
Frederick II in regulations issued (1774) for Silesian higher
schools.
At the request of the empress, Maria Theresa, he repaired to
Vienna in 1774, and was appointed General Commissioner of
Education for all the German lands of her dominions. The same
year he published general school-ordinance, and in 1775 his most
important pedagogical production: "Methodenbuch fuer Lehrer der
deutschen Schulen". His school-reform was copied by Bavaria and
other German lands and was not without influence on Russia.
Considerable opposition, aroused by Felbiger's arbitrariness,
developed in Austria against his plan of founding special
schools for the neglected instruction of soldiers. Maria
Theresa, however, always remained his faithful protectress. Put
his strictly religious principles education displeased Joseph
II, who depraved him his position, assigned him to his
provostship at Presburg, and advised him to look after
educational intests in Hungary (1782). The chief peculiarity of
Felbiger's too mechanical method was the use of tables
containing the initials of the words which expressed the lesson
to be imparted. Other features were the substitution of
class-instruction for individual instruction and the practice of
questioning the pupils. He aimed at raising the social standing,
financial condition, and professional qualification of the
teaching body, at giving a friendly character to the mutual
relations between teacher and pupil. For a list of his 78
publications, which are mainly of a pedagogical character, see
Panholzer's "Methodenbuch" (46-66).
N.A. WEBER
Felician Sisters, O.S.F.
Felician Sisters, 0.S.F.
Founded 21 November, 1855, at Warsaw, Poland, by Mother Mary
Angela, under the direction of Father Honorat, O.F.M. Cap. On
their suppression, in 1864, by the Russian Government they
transferred the mother-house to Cracow, Austria. In the province
of Cracow there are forty-four houses of this congregation, and
in the United States, where the first foundation was made in
1874, there are two provinces, 820 choir and lay sisters, 100
novices, 168 postulants, in charge of 87 schools with 36,700
pupils, 5 orphanages with 416 inmates, 2 homes for the aged, an
emigrant home, working girls' home, and a day nursery.
MOTHER MARY JEROME
Felicissimus
Felicissimus
A deacon of Carthage who, in the middle of the third century,
headed a short-lived but dangerous schism, to which undue
doctrinal importance has been given by a certain class of
writers, Neander, Ritschl, Harnack, and others, who see in it "a
presbyterial reaction against episcopal autocracy". Of the chief
figure in the revolt, Felicissimus, not much can be said. The
movement of which he was afterwards the leader originated in the
opposition of five presbyters of the church in Carthage to St.
Cyprian's election as bishop of that see. One of these
presbyters, Novatus, selected Felicissimus as deacon of his
church in the district called Mons, and because of the
importance of the office of deacon in the African Church,
Felicissimus became the leader of the malcontents. The
opposition of this faction, however, led to no open rupture
until after the outbreak of the Decian persecution in 250, when
St. Cyprian was compelled to flee from the city. His absence
created a situation favourable to his adversaries, who took
advantage of a division already existing in regard to the
methods to be followed in dealing with those who had apostatized
(lapsi) during persecution and who afterwards sought to be
readmitted to Christian fellowship. It was easy under the
circumstances to arouse much hostility to Cyprian, because he
had followed an extremely rigorous policy in dealing with those
lapsi. The crisis was reached when St. Cyprian sent from his
place of hiding a commission consisting of two bishops and two
priests to distribute alms to those who had been ruined during
the persecution. Felicissimus, regarding the activities of these
men as an encroachment on the prerogatives of his office,
attempted to frustrate their mission. This was reported to St.
Cyprian, who at once excommunicate him. Felicissimus immediately
gathered around him all those who were dissatisfied with the
bishop's treatment of the lapsi and proclaimed an open revolt.
The situation was still further complicated by the fact that the
thirty years' peace preceding the Decian persecution had caused
much laxity in the Church, and that on the first outbreak of
hostilities multitudes of Christians had openly apostatized or
resorted to the expedient of purchasing certificates from the
venal officials, attesting their compliance with the emperor's
edict. Besides this the custom of readmitting apostates to
Christian fellowship, if they could show tickets from confessors
or martyrs in their behalf, had resulted in widespread scandals.
While St. Cyprian was in exile he did not succeed in checking
the revolt even though he wisely refrained from excommunicating
those who differed from in regard to the treatment of the lapsi.
After his return to Carthage (251) he convoked a synod of
bishops, priests ansd deacons, in which the sentence of
excommunication against Felicissimus and the heads of faction
was reaffirmed, and in which definite rules were laid down
regarding the manner of readmitting the lapsi. The sentence
against Felicissimus and his followers did not deter them from
appearing before another council, which was held in Carthage the
following year, and demanding that the case be reopend. Their
demand was refused, and they sought to profit by the division in
the Roman Church which had arisen from similar causes, except
that in this case the charge of laxity was levelled against the
orthodox party. This proceding and the fact that the Council of
Carthage had decided with so much moderation in regard to the
lapsi, modifying as it did the rigoristic policy of Cyprian by a
judicious compromise, soon detached from Felicissimus all his
followers, and the schism disappeared.
PATRICK J. HEALY
St. Felicitas
St. Felicitas
MARTYR.
The earliest list of the Roman feasts of martyrs, known as the
"Depositio Martyrum" and dating from the time of Pope Liberius,
i.e. about the middle of the fourth century (Ruinart, Acta
sincera, Ratisbon, p. 631), mentions seven martyrs whose feast
was kept on 10 July. Their remains had been deposited in four
different catacombs, viz. in three cemeteries on the Via Salaria
and in one on the Via Appia. Two of the martyrs, Felix and
Philip, reposed in the catacomb of Priscilla; Martial, Vitalis
and Alexander, in the Coemeterium Jordanorum; Silanus (or
Silvanus) in the catacomb of Maximus, and Januarius in that of
Praetextatus. To the name of Silanus is added the statement that
his body was stolen by the Novatians (hunc Silanum martyrem
Novatiani furati sunt). In the Acts of these martyrs, that
certainly existed in the sixth century, since Gregory the Great
refers to them in his "Homiliae super Evangelia" (Lib. I, hom.
iii, in P.L., LXXVI, 1087), it is stated that all seven were
sons of Felicitas, a noble Roman lady. According to these Acts
Felicitas and her seven sons were imprisoned because of their
Christian Faith, at the instigation of pagan priests, during the
reign of Emperor Antoninus. Before the prefect Publius they
adhered firmly to their religion, and were delivered over to
four judges, who condemned them to various modes of death. The
division of the martyrs among four judges corresponds to the
four places of their burial. St. Felicitas herself was buried in
the catacomb of Maximus on the Via Salaria, beside Silanus.
These Acts were regarded as genuine by Ruinart (op. cit.,
72-74), and even distinguished modern archaeologists have
considered them, though not in their present form corresponding
entirely to the original, yet in substance based on genuine
contemporary records. Recent investigations of Fuehrer, however
(see below), have shown this opinion to be hardly tenable. The
earliest recension of these Acts, edited by Ruinart, does not
antedate the sixth century, and appears to be based not on a
Roman, but on a Greek original. Moreover, apart from the present
form of the Acts, various details have been called in question.
Thus, if Felicitas were really the mother of the seven martyrs
honoured on 10 July, it is strange that her name does not appear
in the well-known fourth-century Roman calendar. Her feast is
first mentioned in the "Martyrologium Hieronymianum", but on a
different day (23 Nov.). It is, however, historically certain
that she, as well as the seven martyrs called her sons in the
Acts suffered for the Christian Faith. From a very early date
her feast was solemnly celebrated in the Roman Church on 23
November, for on that day Gregory the Great delivered a homily
in the basilica that rose above her tomb. Her body then rested
in the catacomb of Maximus; in that cemetery on the Via Salaria
all Roman itineraries, or guides to the burial-places of
martyrs, locate her burial-place, specifying that her tomb was
in a church above this catacomb (De Rossi, Roma sotterranea, I,
176-77), and that the body of her son Silanus was also there.
The crypt where Felicitas was laid to rest was later enlarged
into a subterranean chapel, and was rediscovered in 1885. A
seventh-century fresco is yet visible on the rear wall of this
chapel, representing in a group Felicitas and her seven sons,
and overhead the figure of Christ bestowing upon them the
eternal crown.
Certain historical references to St. Felicitas and her sons
antedate the aforesaid Acts, e.g. a fifth-century sermon of St.
Peter Chrysologus (Sermo cxxxiv, in P.L., LII, 565) and a
metrical epitaph either written by Pope Damasus (d. 384) or
composed shortly after his time and suggested by his poem in
praise of the martyr:
Discite quid meriti praestet pro rege feriri;
Femina non timuit gladium, cum natis obivit,
Confessa Christum meruit per saecula nomen.
[Learn how meritorious it is to die for the King (Christ). This
woman feared not the sword, but perished with her sons. She
confessed Christ and merited an eternal renown.--Ihm, Damasi
Epigrammata (Leipzig, 1895), p. 45.] We possess, therefore,
confirmation for an ancient Roman tradition, independent of the
Acts, to the effect that the Felicitas who reposed in the
catacomb of Maximus, and whose feast the Roman Church
commemorated 23 Nov., suffered martyrdom with her sons; it does
not record, however, any details concerning these sons. It may
be recalled that the tomb of St. Silanus, one of the seven
martyrs (10 July), adjoined that of St. Felicitas and was
likewise honoured; it is quite possible, therefore, that
tradition soon identified the sons of St. Felicitas with the
seven martyrs, and that this formed the basis for the extant
Acts. The tomb of St. Januarius in the catacomb of Praetextatus
belongs to the end of the second century, to which period,
therefore, the martyrdoms must belong, probably under Marcus
Aurelius. If St. Felicitas did not suffer martyrdom on the same
occasion we have no means of determining the time of her death.
In an ancient Roman edifice near the ruins of the Baths of Titus
there stood in early medieval times a chapel in honour of St.
Felicitas. A faded painting in this chapel represents her with
her sons just as in the above-mentioned fresco in her crypt. Her
feast is celebrated 23 Nov.
RUINART, Acta sincera martyrum (Ratisbon, 1859), 72-74; Acta
SS., July, III, 5-18; Bibliotheca hagiographica latina, I,
429-30; ALLARD, Histoire des persecutions (2nd ed., Paris,
1892), I, 345- 68; AUBE, Histoire des persecutions de l'Eglise
jusqu'=85 la fin des Antonins (Paris, 1845), 345 sq., 439 sqq.;
DOULCET, Essai sur les rapports de l'Eglise chretienne avec
l'Etat romain pendant les trois premiers siecles (Paris, 1883),
187-217; DUFOURCQ, Gesta Martyrum romains (Paris, 1900), I,
223-24; DE ROSSI, Bullettino di archeol. crist. (1884-85),
149-84; FoeHRER, Ein Beitrag zur Loesung der Felicitasfrage
(Freising, 1890); IDEM, Zur Felicitasfrage (Leipzig, 1894);
KoeNSTLE, Hagiographische Studien ueber die Passio Felicitatis
cum VII filiis (Paderborn, 1894); MARUCCHI, La catacombe romane
(Rome, 1903), 388-400.
J.P. KIRSCH
Sts. Felicitas and Perpetua
Sts. Felicitas and Perpetua
Martyrs, suffered at Carthage, 7 March 203, together with three
companions, Revocatus, Saturus, and Saturninus. The details of
the martyrdom of these five confessors in the North African
Church have reached us through a genuine, contemporary
description, one of the most affecting accounts of the glorious
warfare of Christian martyrdom in ancient times. By a rescript
of Septimus Severus (193-211) all imperial subjects were
forbidden under severe penalties to become Christians. In
consequence of this decree, five catechumens at Carthage were
seized and cast into prison, viz. Vibia Perpetua, a young
married lady of noble birth; the slave Felicitas, and her
fellow-slave Revocatus, also Saturninus and Secundulus. Soon one
Saturus, who deliberately declared himself a Christian before
the judge, was also incarcerated. Perpetua's father was a pagan;
her mother, however, and two brothers were Christians, one being
still a catechumen; a third brother, the child Dinocrates, had
died a pagan.
After their arrest, and before they were led away to prison, the
five catechumens were baptized. The sufferings of the prison
life, the attempts of Perpetua's father to induce her to
apostatize, the vicissitudes of the martyrs before their
execution, the visions of Saturus and Perpetua in their
dungeons, were all faithfully committed to writing by the last
two. Shortly after the death of the martyrs a zealous Christian
added to this document an account of their execution. The
darkness of their prison and the oppressive atmosphere seemed
frightful to Perpetua, whose terror was increased by anxiety for
her young child. Two deacons succeeded, by sufficiently bribing
the jailer, in gaining admittance to the imprisoned Christians
and alleviated somewhat their sufferings. Perpetua's mother
also, and her brother, yet a catechumen, visited them. Her
mother brought in her arms to Perpetua her little son, whom she
was permitted to nurse and retain in prison with her. A vision,
in which she saw herself ascending a ladder leading to green
meadows, where a flock of sheep was browsing, assured her of her
approaching martyrdom.
A few days later Perpetua's father, hearing a rumour that the
trial of the imprisoned Christians would soon take place, again
visited their dungeon and besought her by everything dear to her
not to put this disgrace on her name; but Perpetua remained
steadfast to her Faith. The next day the trial of the six
confessors took place, before the Procurator Hilarianus. All six
resolutely confessed their Christian Faith. Perpetua's father,
carrying her child in his arms, approached her again and
attempted, for the last time, to induce her to apostatize; the
procurator also remonstrated with her but in vain. She refused
to sacrifice to the gods for the safety of the emperor. The
procurator thereupon had the father removed by force, on which
occasion he was struck with a whip. The Christians were then
condemned to be torn to pieces by wild beasts, for which they
gave thanks to God. In a vision Perpetua saw her brother
Dinocrates, who had did at the early age of seven, at first
seeming to be sorrowful and in pain, but shortly thereafter
happy and healthy. Another apparition, in which she saw herself
fighting with a savage Ethiopian, whom she conquered, made it
clear to her that she would not have to do battle with wild
beasts but with the Devil. Saturus, who also wrote down his
visions, saw himself and Perpetua transported by four angels,
towards the East to a beautiful garden, where they met four
other North African Christians who had suffered martyrdom during
the same persecution, viz. Jocundus, Saturninus, Artaius, and
Quintus. He also saw in this vision Bishop Optatus of Carthage
and the priest Aspasius, who prayed the martyrs to arrange a
reconciliation between them. In the meanwhile the birthday
festival of the Emperor Geta approached, on which occasion the
condemned Christians were to fight with wild beasts in the
military games; they were therefore transferred to the prison in
the camp. The jailer Pudens had learnt to respect the
confessors, and he permitted other Christians to visit them.
Perpetua's father was also admitted and made another fruitless
attempt to pervert her.
Secundulus, one of the confessors, died in prison. Felicitas,
who at the time of her incarceration was with child (in the
eighth month), was apprehensive that she would not be permitted
to suffer martyrdom at the same time as the others, since the
law forbade the execution of pregnant women. Happily, two days
before the games she gave birth to a daughter, who was adopted
by a Christian woman. On 7 March, the five confessors were led
into the amphitheatre. At the demand of the pagan mob they were
first scourged; then a boar, a bear, and a leopard, were set at
the men, and a wild cow at the women. Wounded by the wild
animals, they gave each other the kiss of peace and were then
put to the sword. Their bodies were interred at Carthage. Their
feast day was solemnly commemorated even outside Africa. Thus
under 7 March the names of Felicitas and Perpetua are entered in
the Philocalian calendar, i.e. the calendar of martyrs venerated
publicly in the fourth century at Rome. A magnificent basilica
was afterwards erected over their tomb, the Basilica Majorum;
that the tomb was indeed in this basilica has lately been proved
by Pere Delattre, who discovered there an ancient inscription
bearing the names of the martyrs.
The feast of these saints is still celebrated on 7 March. The
Latin description of their martyrdom was discovered by
Holstenius and published by Poussines. Chapters iii-x contain
the narrative and the visions of Perpetua; chapters xi-ciii the
vision of Saturus; chapters i, ii and xiv-xxi were written by an
eyewitness soon after the death of the martyrs. In 1890 Rendel
Harris discovered a similar narrative written in Greek, which he
published in collaboration with Seth K. Gifford (London, 1890).
Several historians maintain that this Greek text is the
original, others that both the Greek and the Latin texts are
contemporary; but there is no doubt that the Latin text is the
original and that the Greek is merely a translation. That
Tertullian is the author of these Acts is an unproved assertion.
The statement that these martyrs were all or in part Montanists
also lacks proof; at least there is no intimations of it in the
Acts.
HOLSTENIUS, Passio SS. MM. Perpetuae et Felicitatis, ed.
POSSINUS (Rome, 1663); RUINART, Acta sincera martyrum (Ratisbon,
1859), 137 sqq.; Acta SS., March, I, 633-38; HARRIS and GIFFORD,
The Acts of Martyrdom of Perpetua and Felicitas (London, 1890);
ROBINSON, The Passion of S. perpetua in Texts and Studies, I
(Cambridge, 1891),2; FRANCHI DE'CAVALIERI, La Passio SS.
Perpetuae et Felicitatis in Roem. Quartalschr., supplement V
(Rome, 1896); Bibliotheca Hagiographica Latina, ed. BOLLANDISTS,
II, 964; Analecta Bollandiana (1892), 100-02; 369-72; ORSI,
Dissertatio apologetica pro SS. Perpetuae, Felicitatis et
sociorum martyrum orthodoxia (Florence, 1728); PILLET, Les
martyrs d'Afrique, Histoire de Ste Perpetua et de ses compagnons
(Paris, 1885); AUBE, Les actes des SS. Felicite, Perpetue et de
luers compagnons in Les chretiens dans l'Empire Romain (Paris,
1881), 509-25; NEUMANN, Der ramische Staat und die allgemeine
Kirche, I (Leipzig, 1890), 170-76, 299-300; ALLARD, Histoire des
persecutions, II (Paris, 1886), 96 sqq.; MONCEAUX, Histoire
litteraire de l'Afrique chretienne, I (Paris, 1901), 7 0-96;
DELATTRE, La Basilica Maiorum, tombeau des SS. Perpetue et
Felicite in Comples-rendus de l'Academie des Inscriptions et
Belles-Lettres (1907), 516-31.
J.P. KIRSCH
Pope St. Felix I
Pope St. Felix I
Date of birth unknown; d. 274. Early in 269 he succeeded Saint
Dionysius as head of the Roman Church. About this time there
arrived at Rome, directed to Pope Dionysius, the report of the
Synod of Antioch which in that very year had deposed the local
bishop, Paul of Samosata, for his heretical teachings concerning
the doctrine of the Trinity (see Antioch). A letter, probably
sent by Felix to the East in response to the synodal report,
containing an exposition of the doctrine of the Trinity, was at
a later date interpolated in the interest of his sect by a
follower of Apollinaris (see Apollinarianism). This spurious
document was submitted to the Council of Ephesus in 431 (Mansi,
"Coll. conc.", IV, 1188; cf. Harnack, "Geschichte der
altchristlichen Literatur", I, 659 sqq.; Bardenhewer,
"Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur", II, 582 sq.). The
fragment preserved in the Acts of the council lays special
emphasis on the unity and identity of the Son of God and the Son
of Man in Christ. The same fragment gives Pope Felix as a
martyr; but this detail, which occurs again in the biography of
the pope in the "Liber Pontificalis" (Ed. Duchesne, I, 58), is
unsupported by any authentic earlier evidence and is manifestly
due to a confusion of names. According to the notice in the
"Liber Pontificalis", Felix erected a basilica on the Via
Aurelia; the same source also adds that he was buried there
("Hic fecit basilicam in Via Aurelia, ubi et sepultus est"). The
latter detail is evidently an error, for the fourth century
Roman calendar of feasts says that Pope Felix was interred in
the Catacomb of St. Callistus on the Via Appia ("III Kal.
Januarii, Felicis in Callisti", it reads in the "Depositio
episcoporum"). The statement of the "Liber Pontificalis"
concerning the pope's martyrdom results obviously from a
confusion with a Roman martyr of the same name buried on the Via
Aurelia, and over whose grave a church was built. In the Roman
"Feriale" or calendar of feasts, referred to above, the name of
Felix occurs in the list of Roman bishops (Depositio
episcoporum), and not in that of the martyrs. The notice in the
"Liber Pontificalis" ascribes to this pope a decree that Masses
should be celebrated on the tombs of martyrs ("Hic constituit
supra memorias martyrum missas celebrare"). The author of this
entry was evidently alluding to the custom of celebrating the
Holy Sacrifice privately, at the altars near or over the tombs
of the martyrs in the crypts of the catacombs (missa ad corpus),
while the solemn celebration of the Sacred Mysteries always took
place in the basilicas built over the catacombs. This practice,
still in force at the end of the fourth century (Prudentius,
"Peristephanon", XI, vv. 171 sqq.), dates apparently from the
period when the great cemeterial basilicas were built in Rome,
and owes its origin to the solemn commemoration services of
martyrs, held at their tombs on the anniversary of their burial,
as early as the third century. Felix probably issued no such
decree, but the compiler of the "Liber Pontificalis" attributed
it to him because he made no departure from the custom in force
in his time. According to the above-mentioned detail of the
"Depositio episcoporum", Felix was interred in the catacomb of
St. Callistus, 30 December. In the present Roman Martyrology his
name occurs 30 May, the date given in the "Liber Pontificalis"
as that of his death (III Kal. Jun.); it is probably an error
which could easily occur through a transcriber writing Jun. for
Jan.
Liber Pontificalis, ed. Duchesne, I, introd. cxxv; text, 158,
with the notes; De Rossi, Roma sotterranea, II, 98-104; Acta
SS., May, VII, 236-37; Langen, Geschichte der roemischen Kirche
(Bonn, 1881), I, 365-69; Allard, Histoire des persecutions, III,
243 sqq.
J.P. KIRSH
Felix II
Felix II
Pope (more properly Antipope), 355-358; d. 22 Nov., 365.
In 355 Pope Liberius was banished to Beraea in Thrace by the
Emperor Constantius because he upheld tenaciously the Nicene
definition of faith and refused to condemn St. Athanasius of
Alexandria. The Roman clergy pledged itself in solemn conclave
not to acknowledge any other Bishop of Rome while Liberius was
alive. ("Marcellini et Fausti Libellus precum", no.1 : "Quae
gesta sunt inter Liberium et Felicem episcopos" in "Collectio
Avellana", ed. Gunter; Hieronymus, "Chronicon", ad an. Abr.
2365). The emperor, however, who was supplanting the exiled
Catholic bishops with the bishops of Arian tendencies, exerted
himself to install a new Bishop of Rome in place of the banished
Liberius. He invited to Milan Felix, archdeacon of the Roman
Church; on the latter's arrival, Acacius of Caesarea succeeded
in inducing him to accept the office from which Liberius had
been forcibly expelled, and to be consecrated by Acacius and two
other Arian bishops. The majority of the Roman clergy
acknowledged the validity of his consecration but the laity
would have nothing to do with him and remained true to the
banished but lawful pope.
When Constantius visited Rome in May, 357, the people demanded
the recall of their rightful bishop Liberius who, in fact,
returned soon after signing the third formula of Sirmium. The
bishops, assembled in that city of Lower Pannonia, wrote to
Felix and the Roman clergy advising there to receive Liberius in
all charity and to put aside their dissensions; it was added
that L.iberius and Felix should together govern the Church of
Rome. The people received their legitimate pope with great
enthusiasm, but a great commotion rose against Felix, who was
finally driven from the city. Soon after, he attempted, with the
help of his adherents to occupy the Basilica Julii (Santa Maria
in Trastevere), but was finally banished in perpetuity by
unanimous vote of the Senate and the people. He retired to the
neighbouring Porto, where he lived quietly till his death.
Liberius permitted the members of the Roman clergy, including
the adherents of Felix, to retain their positions. Later legend
confound the relative positions of Felix and Liberius. In the
apocryphal "Acta Felicis" and "Acta Liberii", as well as in the
"Liber pontificalis", Felix was portrayed as a saint and
confessor of the true Faith. This distortion of the true facts
originated most probably through confusion of this Felix with
another Felix, a Roman martyr of an earler date.
According to the "Liber Pontificalis", which may be registering
here a reliable tradition, Felix built a church on the via
Aurelia. It is well known that on this road was buried a Roman
martyr, Felix; hence it seems not improbable that apropos of
both there arose a confusion (see FELIX I) through which the
real story of the antipope was lost and he obtained in local
Roman history the status of a saint and a confessor. As such he
appears in the Roman Martyrology on 29 July.
J.P. KIRSCH
Pope St. Felix III
Pope St. Felix III
(Reigned 483-492).
Born of a Roman senatorial family and said to have been an
ancestor of Saint Gregory the Great. Nothing certain is known of
Felix, till he succeeded St. Simplicitus in the Chair of Peter
(483). At that time the Church was still in the midst of her
long conflict with the Eutychian heresy. In the preceding year,
the Emperor Zeno, at the suggestion of Acacius, the perfidious
Patriarch of Constantinoble, had issued an edict known as the
Hereticon or Act of Union, in which he declared that no symbol
of faith, other than that of Nice, with the additions of 381,
should be received. The edict was intended as a bond of
reconciliation between Catholics and Eutychians, but it caused
greater conflicts than ever, and split the Church of the East
into three or four parties. As the Catholics everywhere spurned
the edict, the emperor had driven the Patriarchs of Antioch and
Alexandria from their sees. Peter the Tanner, a notorious
heretic, had again intruded himself into the See of Antioch, and
Peter Mongus, who was to be the real source of trouble during
the pontificate of Felix, had seized that of Alexandria. In his
first synod Felix excommunicated Peter the Tanner, who was
likewise condemned by Acacius in a synod of Constantinoble. In
484, Felix also excommunicated Peter Mongus -- an act, which
brought about a schism between East and West, that was not
healed for thirty-five years. This Peter, being a time-server
and of a crafty deposition, ingratiated himself with the emperor
and Acacius by subscribing to the Henoticon, and was thereupon,
to the displeasure of many of the bishops, admitted to communion
by Acacius.
Felix, having convened a synod, sent legates to the emperor and
Acacius, with the request that they should expel Peter Mongus
from Alexandria and that Acacius himself should come to Rome to
explain his conduct. The legates were detained and imprisoned;
then urged by threats and promises, they held communion with the
heretics by distinctly uttering the name of Peter in the
readings of the sacred diptychs. When their treason was made
known at Rome by Simeon, one of the "Acaemeti" monks, Felix
convened a synod of seventy-seven bishops in the Lateran
Basilica, in which Acacius as well as the papal legates were
also excommunicated. Supported by the emperor Acacius
disregarded the excommunication, removed the pope's name from
the sacred diptychs, and remained in the see till his death,
which took place one or two years later. His successor
Phravitas, sent messengers to Fe!ix, assuring him that he would
not hold communion with Peter, but, the pope learning that this
was a deception, the schism continued. Peter, having died in the
meantime Ethymus who succeeded Phravitas, also sought communion
with Rome, but the pope refused, as Euthymius would not remove
the names of his two predecessors from the sacred diptychs. The
schism, known as the Acacian Schism was not finally healed till
518 in the reign of Justinian. In Africa the Arian Vandals,
Genseric and his son Huneric had been persecuting the Church for
more than 50 years and had driven many Catholics into exile.
When peace was restored, numbers of those who through fear had
fallen into heresy and had been rebaptized by the Arians desired
to return to the Church. On being repulsed by those who had
remained firm, they appealed to Felix who convened a synod in
487, and sent a letter to the bishops of Africa, expounding the
conditions under which they were to be received back. Felix died
in 492, having reigned eight years, eleven months and
twenty-three days.
AMBROSE COLEMAN
Pope Felix IV
Pope St. Felix IV
(Reigned 526-530).
On 18 May, 526, Pope John I (q.v.) died in prison at Ravenna, a
victim of the angry suspicions of Theodoric, the Arian king of
the Goths. When, through the powerful influence of this ruler,
the cardinal-priest, Felix of Samnium, son of Castorius, was
brought forward in Rome as John's successor, the clergy and
laity yielded to the wish of the Gothic king and chose Felix
pope. He was consecrated Bishop of Rome 12 July, 526, and took
advantage of the favor he enjoyed at the court of Theodoric to
further the interests of the Roman Church, discharging the
duties of his office in a most worthy manner. On 30 August, 526,
Theodoric died, and, his grandson Athalaric being a minor, the
government was conducted by Athalaric's mother Amalasuntha,
daughter of Theodoric and favorably disposed towards the
Catholics. To the new ruler the Roman clergy addressed a
complaint on the usurpation of their privileges by the civil
power. A royal edict, drawn up by Cassiodorus in terms of the
deepest respect for the papal authority, confirmed the ancient
custom that every civil or criminal charge of a layman against a
cleric should be submitted to the pope, or to an ecclesiastical
court appointed by him. A fine of ten pounds of gold was imposed
as a punishment for the violation of this order, and the money
thus obtained was to be distributed amongst the poor by the pope
(Cassiodorus, "Variae", VIII, n. 24, ed. Mommsen, "Mon. Germ.
Hist.: Auctores antiquiss.", XII, 255) The pope received as a
gift from Amalasuntha two ancient edifices in the Roman Forem,
the Temple of Romulus, son of the Emperor Maxentius, and the
adjoining Templum sacroe urbis, the Roman land registry office.
The pope converted the buildings into the Church of SS. Cosmas
and Damian, which still exists and in the apse of which is
preserved the large and magnificent mosaic executed by order of
Felix, the figure of the pope, however, being a later
restoration (see COSMAS AND DAMIAN). Felix also took part in the
so-called Semipelagian conflict in Southern Gaul concerning the
nature and efficiency of grace. He sent to the bishops of those
parts a ser5ies of "Capitula", regarding grace and free will,
compiled from Scripture and the Fathers. These capitula were
published as canons at the Synod of Orange (529). In addition
Felix approved the work of Caesarius of Arles against Faustus of
Riez on grace and free will (De gratia et libero arbitrio).
Rendered anxious by the political dissensions of the Romans,
many of whom stood for the interests of Byzantium, while others
supported Gothic Rule, Felix IV, when he fell seriously ill in
the year 530, wished to ensure the peace of the Roman Church by
naming his successor. Having given over to Archdeacon Boniface
his pallium, he made it known publicly that he had chosen
Boniface to succeed him, and that he had apprised the court of
Ravenna of his action ("Neues Archiv", XI, 1886, 367; Duchesne,
"Liber Pontificalis", I, 282, note 4). Felix IV died soon
afterwards, but in the papal election which followed his wishes
were disregarded (see BONIFACE II). The feast of Felix IV is
celebrated on 30 January. The day of his death is uncertain, but
it was probably towards the end of September, 530.
J.P. KIRSCH
Felix V
Felix V
Regnal name of Amadeus of Savoy, Antipope (1440-1449).
Born 4 December, 1383, died at Ripaille, 7 January, 1451. The
schismatic Council of Basle, having declared the rightful pope,
Eugene IV, deposed, proceeded immediately with the election of
an antipope. Wishing to secure additional influence and
increased financial support, they turned their attention towards
the rich and powerful prince, Duke Amadeus VIII of Savoy.
Amadeus had exercised over his dependencies a mild and equitable
sway, and had evinced a great zeal for the interests of the
Church, especially in connection with the Western Schism
regarding the papal succession, brought to a close by the
Council of Constance. Emperor Sigismund had shown his
appreciation of this ruler's services by raising, in 1416, the
former counts of Savoy to the status of a duchy, and in 1422
conferred on Arnadeus the county of Geneva. On the death of his
wife, Maria of Burgundy, Duke Amadeus resolved to lead
henceforth a life of contemplation, without however entirely
resigning the government of his territories. He appointed his
son Ludwig regent of the duchy, and retired to Ripaille on the
Lake of Geneva, where in company with five knights whom he had
formed into an Order of St. Maurice, he led a semi-monastic life
in accordance with a rule drawn up by himself.
Amadeus had been in close relations with the schismatic council
of Basle; and was elected pope, 30 October, 1439, by the
electoral college of that council, including one cardinal
(d'Allamand of Aries), eleven bishops, seven abbots, five
theologians, and nine canonists. After long negotiations with a
deputation from the council, Amadeus acquiesced in the election,
5 Feb., 1440, completely renouncing at the same time all further
participation in the government of his duchy. Ambition and a
certain fantastic turn of character induced him to take this
step. He took the name of Felix V, and was solemnly consecrated
and crowned by the Cardinal d'Allamand, 24 July, 1440. Eugene IV
had already excommunicated him, 23 March, at the council of
Florence. Until 1442, the famous Aeneas Sylvinus Piccolomini,
later Pius II, was the antipope's secretary. This renewal of the
schism ruined any success of Basle assembly, just closed at
Constance. Subsequently, Amadeus took up his residence in Savoy
and Switzerland; his efforts to surround himself with a curia
met with little success; many of those whom he named cardinals
declined the dignity. He found general recognition only in Savoy
and Switzerland, but his claims were also recognized by the
Dukes of Austria, Tyrol, and Bayern-Muenchen, the Count-Palatine
of Simmern, the Teutonic Order, some orders in Germany and some
universities hitherto adherents of Basle. He was soon embroiled
in a quarrel with the Council of Basle concerning his rights and
the distribution of revenues. The rightful pope, Eugene IV, and
his successor Nicolas V (1447), who were universally recognized
from the first in Spain and Poland, found their claims even more
widely admitted in France and Germany. In 1442, Felix left
Basle, and on 16 May, 1443, occurred the last session of the
Baste assembly. Felix, who had for the sake of its revenue
assumed the administration of the Diocese of Geneva, clung for
six years more to his usurped dignity but finally submtted
(1449) to Nicolas V, received the title of Cardinal of St.
Sabina, and was appointed permanent Apostolic vicar-general for
all the states of the House of Savoy and for several dioceses
(Basle, Strasburg, Chur, etc.). Thus ended the last papal
schism.
J.P. KIRSCH
Celestin Joseph Felix
Celestin Joseph Felix
French Jesuit, b. at Neuville-sur-l' Escaut (Nord), 28 June
1810; d. at Lille, 7 July, 1891. He began his studies under the
Brothers of Christian Doctrine, going later to the preparatory
seminary at Cambrai, where he completed his secondary studies.
In 1833 he was named professor of rhetoric, received minor
orders and the diaconate, and in 1837 entered the Society of
Jesus. He began his noviceship at Tronchiennes in Belgium,
continued it at Saint-Acheul, and ended it at Brugelettes, where
he studied philosophy and the sciences. Having completed his
theological studies at Louvain, he was ordained in 1842 and
returned to Brugelettes to teach rhetoric and philosophy. His
earliest Lenten discourses, preached at Ath, and especially one
on true patriotism, soon won him a brilliant reputations for
eloquence.
Called to Amiens in 1850, he introduced the teaching of rhetoric
at the College de la Providence and preaching during Advent and
Lent at the cathedral. His oratorical qualities becoming more
and more evident, he was called to Paris. He first preached at
St. Thomas d'Aquin in 1851, and in 1852 preached Lenten sermons
at Saint-Germain-des-Pres, and those of Advent at Saint-Sulpice.
It was then that Mgr. Sibour named him to succeed the Dominican,
Father Lacordaire, and the Jesuit, Father de Ravignan in the
pulpit of Notre-Dame (1853 to 1870). He became one of its
brilliant orators. The conferences of the first three years have
not been published in full. In 1856 Pere Felix began the subject
which he made the master-work of his life: "Progres par le
Christianisme". This formed the matter of a series of Lenten
conferences which are preserved for us in fifteen voIumes, and
which have lost none of their reality. True progress in all its
forms, whether of the individual or of the family, in science,
art, morals, or government, is herein treated with great
doctrinal exactness and breadth of view. The practical
conclusions of these conferences Pere Felix summed up every year
in his preaching of the Easter retreat, which had been
inaugurated by Pere de Ravignan. This was the side of his
ministry which lay nearest his heart. While he was in Paris, and
especially during his stay at Nancy (1867-1883), and at Lille
(1883-1891), the illustrious Jesuit spoke in nearly all the
great cathedrals of France and Belgium. In 1881 he even went to
Copenhagen to conduct the Advent exercises, and there he held a
celebrated conference on authority. Felix founded the Society of
St. Michael for the distribution of good books and employed the
leisure moments of his last years in the composition of several
works and in the revision of his "Retraites a Notre-Dame", which
he published in six volumes.
The eloquence of Pere Felix was charaeterised by clearness,
vigorous logic, unction, and pathos, even in his reasoning. He
lacked imagination and the enthusiasm of Lacordaire, but he was
more skilled in dialectic and surer in doctrine. His diction was
richer than that of de Ravignan, and while he was less didactic
than Monsabre he was more original. A list of his works is given
by Sommervozgel.
LOUIS LALANDE
Sts. Felix and Adauctus
Sts. Felix and Adauctus
Martyrs at Rome, 303, under Diocletian and Maximian. The Acts,
first published in Ado's Martyrology, relate as follows: Felix,
a Roman priest, and brother of another priest, also named Felix,
being ordered to offer sacrifice to the gods, was brought by the
prefect Dracus to the temples of Serapis, Mercury, and Diana.
But at the prayer of the saint the idols fell shattered to the
ground. He was then led to execution. On the way an unknown
person joined him, professed himself a Christian, and also
received the crown of martyrdom. The Christians gave him the
name Adauctus (added). These Acts are considered a legendary
embellishment of a misunderstood inscription by Pope Damasus. A
Dracus cannot be found among the prefects of Rome; the other
Felix of the legend is St. Felix of Nola; and Felix of Monte
Pincio is the same Felix honoured on the Garden Hill. The
brother is imaginary (Anal. Boll., XVI, 19-29). Their
veneration, however, is very old; they are commemorated in the
Sacramentary of Gregory the Great and in the ancient
martyrologies. Their church in Rome, built over their graves, in
the cemetery of Commodilla, on the Via Ostiensis, near the
basilica of St. Paul, and restored by Leo III, was discovered
about three hundred years ago and again unearthed in 1905
(Civilt`a Catt., 1905, II, 608). Leo IV, about 850, is said to
have given their relics to Irmengard, wife of Lothair I; she
placed them in the abbey of canonesses at Eschau in Alsace. They
were brought to the church of St. Stephen in Vienna in 1361. The
heads are claimed by Anjou and Cologne. According to the
"Chronicle of Andechs" (Donauwoerth, 1877, p. 69), Henry, the
last count, received the relics from Honorius III and brought
them to the Abbey of Andechs. Their feast is kept on 30 August.
Stokes in Dict. Christ. Biog., s. v. Felix (217); Acta SS.,
Aug., VI, 545; Stadler, Heiligenlexicon, s.v.
FRANCIS MERSHMAN
St. Felix of Cantalice
St. Felix of Cantalice
A Capuchin friar, b. at Cantalice, on the north-western border
of the Abruzzi; d. at Rome, 18 May, 1587. His feast is
celebrated among the Franciscans and in certain Italian dioceses
on 18 May. He is usually represented in art as holding in his
arms the Infant Jesus, because of a vision he once had, when the
Blessed Virgin appeared to him and placed the Divine Child in
his arms.
His parents were peasant folk, and very early he was set to tend
sheep. When nine years of age he was hired out to a farmer at
Cotta Ducale with whom he remained for over twenty years, first
as a shepherd-boy and afterwards as a farm labourer. But from
his earliest years Felix evinced signs of great holiness,
spending all his leisure time in prayer, either in the harsh or
in some solitary place. A friend of his having read to him the
lives ot the Fathers of the Desert, Felix conceived a great
desire for the eremitical life, but at the same time feared to
live otherwise than under the obedience of a superior. After
seeking light in prayer, he determined to ask admittance amongst
the Capuchins. At first the friars hesitated to accept him, but
he eventually received the habit, in 1543, at Anticoli in the
Roman Province. It was not without the severest temptations that
he persevered and made his profession. These temptations were so
severe as injure his bodily health. In 1547 he was sent to Rome
and appointed questor for the community. Here he remained for
the rest of his life, and in fulfilling his lowly office became
a veritable apostle of Rome.
The influence which he speedily gained with the Roman people is
an evidence of the inherent power of personal holiness over the
consciences of men. He had no learning he could not even read;
yet learned theologians came to consult him upon the.science of
the spiritual life and the Scriptures. Whenever he appeared in
the streets of Rome vicious persons grew abased and withdrew
from his sight. Sometimes Felix would stop them and earnestly
exhort them to live a better life; especially did he endeavour
to restrain young men. But judges and dignitaries also at times
incurred his rebuke, he was no respecter of persons when it was
a matter of preventing sin. On one occasion, during a Carnival,
he and St. Philip Neri organized a procession with their
crucifix; then came the Capuchin friars; last came Felix leading
Fra Lupo, a well-known Capuchin preacher, by a rope round his
neck, to represent Our Lord led to judgment by his executioners.
Arrived in the middle of the revels, the procession halted and
Fra Lupo preached to the people. The Carnival, with its open
vice, was broken up for that year.
But Felix's special apostolate was amongst the children of the
city, with whom his childlike simplicity made him a special
favourite. His method with these was to gather them together in
bands and, forming circle, set them to sing canticles of his own
composing, by which he taught them the beauty of a good life and
the ugliness of sin. These canticles became popular and
frequently, when on his rounds in quest of alms, Felix would be
invited into the houses of his benefactors and asked to sing. He
would seize the opportunity to bring home some spiritual truth
in extemporized verse. During the famine of 1580 the directors
of the city's charities asked his superiors to place Felix at
their disposal to collect alms for the starving, and he was
untiring in his quest.
St. Philip Neri had a deep affection for the Capuchin lay
brother, whom he once proclaimed the greatest saint then living
in the Church. When St. Charles Borromeo sought St. Philip's aid
in drawing up the constitutions of his Oblates, St. Philip took
him to St. Felix as the most competent adviser in such matters.
But through all, Felix kept his wonderful humility and
simplicity. He was accustomed to style himself "Ass of the
Capuchins". Acclaimed a Saint by the people of Rome, immediately
after his death, he was beatified by Urban VIII in 1625, and
canonized by Clement Xl in 1712. His body rests under an altar
dedicated to him in the church of the Immaculate Conception to
Rome.
FATHER CUTHBERT
St. Felix of Nola
St. Felix of Nola
Born at Nola, near Naples, and lived in the third century. After
his father's death he distributed almost all his goods amongst
the poor, and was ordained priest by Maximum Bishop of Nola. In
the year 250, when the Decian persecution broke out, Maximus was
forced to flee. The persecutors seized on Felix and he was
cruelly scourged, loaded with chains, and cast into prison. One
night an angel appeared to him and bade him go to help Maximus.
His chains fell off, the doors opened, and the saint was enabled
to bring relief to the bishop, who was then speechless from cold
and hunger. On the persecutors making a second attempt to secure
Felix, his escape was miraculously effected by a spider weaving
her web over the opening of a hole into which he had just crept.
Thus deceived, they sought their prey elsewhere. The persecution
ceased the following year, and Felix, who had lain hidden in a
dry well for six months, returned to his duties. On the death of
Maximus he was earnestly desired as bishop, but he persuaded the
people to choose another, his senior in the priesthood. The
remnant of his estate having been confiscated in the
persecution, he refused to take it back, and for his subsistence
rented three acres of land, which he tilled with his own hands.
Whatever remained over he gave to the poor, and if he had two
coats at any time he invariably gave them the better. He lived
to a ripe old age and died 14 January (on which day he is
commemorated), but the year of his death is uncertain. Five
churches were built in his honour, outside Nola, where his
remains are kept, but some relics are also at Rome and
Benevento. St. Paulinus, who acted as porter to one of these
churches, testifies to numerous pilgrimages made in honour of
Felix. The poems and letters of Paulinus on Felix are the source
from which St. Gregory of Tours, Venerable Bede, and the priest
Marcellus have drawn their biographies (see PAULINUS OF NOLA).
There is another Felix of Nola, bishop and martyr under a
Prefect Martianus. He is considered by some to be the same as
the above.
AMBROSE COLEMAN
St. Felix of Valois
St. Felix of Valois
Born in 1127; d. at Cerfroi, 4 November, 1212. He is
commemorated 20 November. He was surnamed Valois because,
according to some, he was a member of the royal branch of Valois
in France, according to others, because he was a native of the
province of Valois. At an early age he renounced his possessions
and retired to a dense forest in the Diocese of Meaux, where he
gave himself to prayer and contemplation. He was joined in his
retreat by St. John of Matha, who proposed to him the project of
founding an order for the redemption of captives. After fervent
prayer, Felix in company with John set out for Rome and arrived
there in the beginning of the pontificate of Innocent III. They
had letters of recommendation from the Bishop of Paris, and the
new pope received them with the utmost kindness and lodged them
in his palace. The project of founding the order was considered
in several solemn conclaves of cardinals and prelates, and the
pope after fervent prayer decided that these holy men were
inspired by God, and raised up for the good of the Church. He
solemnly confirmed their order, which he named the Order of the
Holy Trinity for the Redemption of Captives. The pope
commissioned the Bishop of Paris and the Abbot of St. Victor to
draw up for the institute a rule, which was confirmed by the
pope, 17 December, 1198. Felix returned to France to establish
the order. He was received with great enthusiasm, and King
Philip Augustus authorized the institute France and fostered it
by signal benefactions. Margaret of Blois granted the order
twenty acres of the wood where Felix had built his first
hermitage, and on almost the same spot he erected the famous
monastery of Cerfroi, the mother-house of the institute. Within
forty years the order possessed six hundred monasteries in
almost every part of the world. St. Felix and St. John of Matha
were forced to part, the latter went to Rome to found a house of
the order, the church of which, Santa Maria in Navicella, still
stands on the Caeclian Hill. St. Felix remained in France to
look after the interests of the congregation. He founded a house
in Paris attached to the church of St. Maturinus, which
afterwards became famous under Robert Guguin, master general of
the order. Though the Bull of his canonization is no longer
extant, it is the constant tradition of his institute that he
was canonized by Urban IV in 1262. Du Plessis tells us that his
feast was kept in the Diocese of Meaux in 1215. In 1666
Alexander VII declared him a saint because of immemorial cult.
His feast was transferred to 20 November by Innocent XI in 1679.
MICHAEL M. O'KANE
Francois Xavier de Feller
Franc,ois-Xavier de Feller
An author and apologist, b at Brussels 18 August, 1735; d. at
Ratisbon 22 May, 1802. He received his primary scientific
education in the Jesuit College at Luxemburg, studied philosophy
and the exact sciences at Reims, 1752-54, after which he joined
the Society of Jesus at Tournai. Appointed professor of
humanities soon after, he edited the "Musae Leodienses" (Liege,
1761), a collection of Latin poems in two volumes composed lay
his pulpils. Later he taught theology in various institutions of
the order in Luxemburg and Tyrnau (Hungary). After the
suppression of the order he was active as preacher in Liege and
Luxemburg until, at the approach of the French army in 1794, he
emigrated to Paderborn and joined the local college of the
ex-Jesuits. After staying there two years, he accepted the
invitation of the Prince of Hohenlohe to come to Bavaria and
join the court of the Prince-Bishop of Freising and Ratisbon,
Joseph Konrad von Schroffenburg, with whom he remained, dividing
his time between Freising, Ratisbon, and Berchtesgaden.
Feller was very amiable and talented, gifted with a prodigious
memory, and combined diligent study with these abilities. His
superiors had given him every opportunity during his travels of
cultivating all the branches of science then known, and the
wealth and diversity of his writings prove that he made good use
of his advantages. All his writings attest his allegiance to the
Jesuit Order and his untiring zeal for the Catholic religion and
the Holy See.
Although he became prominent as a literary man only after the
suppression of his order, he had previously contributed articles
of note to the periodical "La clef du cabinet des princes de
l'Europe, ou recucil historique et politique sur les matieres du
temps" (Luxemburg, 1760). During the years 1773-1794 he was the
sole contributor to this journal, which comprised in all sixty
volumes and was, from the first mentioned date (1773), published
under the title "Journal historique et litteraire". Because he
publicly denounced the illegal and despotic attempts at reform
on the part of Joseph II, the journal was suppressed in Austrian
territory and was, consequently, transplanted first to Liege and
then to Maastricht. Its principal articles were published
separately as "Melanges de politique, de morale chretienne et de
litterature" (Louvain, 1822), and as "Cours de morale chretienne
et de litterature religieuse" (Paris, 1826). His next work of
importance is entitled "Dictionnaire historique, ou histoire
abregee de tous les hommes qui se sont fait un nom par le genie,
les talents, les vertus, les erreurs, etc., depuis le
commencement du monde jusqu'a nos jours" (Augsburg, 1781-1784),
6 vols. He shaped this work on the model of a simular one by
Chaudon without giving the latter due credit; he also showed a
certain amount of prejudice, for the most part lauding the
Jesuits as masters of science and underrating others, especially
those suspected of Jansenistic tendencies. This work was
frequently revised and republished, e.g. by Ecury, Ganith,
Henrion, Perennes, Simonin, Weiss, etc.; from 1837 it appeared
under the title of "Biographie universelle". His principal work,
which first appreared under the pen-name "Flexier de Reval", is
"Catechisme philosophique ou recueil d'observations propres `a
defendre la religion chretienne contre ses ennemis" (Liege,
1772). In his treatise, "Jugement d'un ecrivain protestant
touchant le livre de Justinus Febronius" (Leipzig, 1770), he
attacked the tenets of that anti-papal writer. Many of his works
are only of contemporary interest.
Biographie Universelle, XIII. 505; Hunter, Nomenclator.
PATRICIUS SCHLAGER
Johann Michael Nathanael Feneberg
Johann Michael Nathanael Feneberg
Born in Oberdorf, Allgau, Bavaria, 9 Feb., 1751; died 12 Oct.,
1812. He studied at Kaufbeuren and in the Jesuit gymnasium at
Augsburg, and in 1770 entered the Society of Jesus, at
Landsberg, Bavaria. When the Society was suppressed in 1773, he
left the town, but continued his studies, was ordained in 1775
and appointed professor in the gymnasium of St. Paul at
Ratisbon. From 1778-85 he held a modest benefice at Oberdorf and
taught a private school, in 1785 he was appointed professor of
rhetoric and poetry at the gymnasium of Dillingen, but was
removed in 1793, together with several other professors
suspected of leanings towards Illuminism. A plan of studies
drawn up by him for the gymnasium brought him many enemies also.
He was next given the parish of Seeg comprising some two
thousand five hundred and received as assistants the celebrated
author Christoph Schmid, and X. Bayer. He was a model pastor in
every respect. Within a short time he executed a chart of the
eighty-five villages in his parish, and took a census of the
entire district.
In the first year of his pastoral service he sustained severe
injuries by a fall from his horse, which necessitated the
amputation of one leg just below the knee. He bore the operation
without an anasthetic, and consoled himself for the loss of the
limb by saying: Non pedibus, sed corde diligimus Deum (We love
God notwith our feet but with our hearts). Shortly after, his
relations with the priest Martin Boos led him to be suspected of
false mysticism. Boos had created such a sensation by his
sermons that he was compelled to flee for safety. He took at
Seeg with Feneberg, who was a relation and assisted him in
parochial for nearly a year. In the meantime he strove to
convert or "awaken" Feneberg life, the life of faith and to the
exclusion of good works. Boos's followers were called the
Erweckten Brueder (Awakened Brethren). Among these brethren,
many of whom were priests, Feneberg was called Nathanael and his
two assistants Markus and Silas.
Boos's preaching and conduct at Seeg was reported to the
ordinary of Augsburg, and Feneberg, with his assistants, Bayer
and Siller, were also involved. In February, 1797, an episcopal
commissioner arrived in Seeg, and in Feneberg's absence seized
all his papers, private correspondence and manuscripts, and
carried them to Augsburg. Feneberg, with his assistants,
appeared before an ecclesiastical tribunal at Augsburg in
August, 1797; they were required to subscribe to the
condemnation of ten erroneous propositions and then permitted to
return to their parish. They all protested that they had never
held any of the propositions in the sense implied. It does not
appear that Feneberg was subsequently molested in this
connection, nor did he ever fail to show due respect and
obedience to the ecclesiastical authorities. In 1805 he resigned
the parish of Seeg and accepted that of Vohringen, which was
smaller but returned slightly better revenues. This appointment
and the assistance of generous friends enabled him to pay the
debts he had incurred on account of his trouble and the
political disturbances of the time. For a month before his death
he suffered great bodily pain but he prayed unceasingly, and
devoutedly receiving the sacraments expired.
He remained friendly to Boos even after the latter's
condemnation, and regretted that his friend, Bishop Sailer, was
not more sympathetic to mysticism. Feneberg was a man of
singular piety, candour, and zeal but failed to see the dangers
lurking in Boos pietism. Numbers of the disciples of Boos--as
many as four hundred at one time--became Protestants, although
he himself remained nominally in the Church. Feneberg is the
author of a translation of the New Testament, which was
published by Bishop Wittmann of Ratishon.
ALEXIS HOFFMANN
Francois Fenelon
Franc,ois de Salignac de la Mothe-Fenelon
A celebrated French bishop and author, b. in the Chateau de
Fenelon in Perigord (Dordogne), 6 August, 1651; d. at Cambrai, 7
January, 1715. He came of ancient family of noble birth but
small means, the most famous of his ancestors being Bertrand de
Salignac (d. 1599), who fought at Metz under the Duke Guise and
became ambassador to England; also Franc,ois de Salignac I,
Louis de Salignac I, Louis de Saligac II, and Franc,ois de
Salignac II, bishops of Sarlat between 1567 and 1688. Fenelon
was the second of the three children of Pons de Salignac, Count
de La Mothe-Fenelon, by his second wife, Louise de La Cropte.
Owing to his delicate health Fenelon's childhood was passed in
his father's chateau under a tutor, who succeeded in giving him
a keen taste for the classics and a considerable knowledge of
Greek literature, which influenced the development of his mind
in marked degree. At the age of twelve he was sent to the
neighbouring University of Cahors, where he studied rhetoric and
philosophy, and obtained his first degrees. As he had already
expressed his intention of entering the Church, one of his
uncles, Marquis Antoine de Fenelon, a friend of Monsieur Olier
and St. Vincent de Paul, sent him to Paris and placed him in the
College du Plessis, whose students followed the course of
theology at the Sorbonne. There Fenelon became a friend of
Antoine de Noailles, afterwards, Cardinal and Archbishop of
Paris, and showed such decided talent that at the age of fifteen
he was chosen to preach a public sermon, in which he acquitted
admirably. To facilitate his preparation for the priesthood, the
marquis sent his nephew to the Seminaire de Saint-Sulpice (about
1672), then under the direction of Monsieur Tronson, but the
young man was placed in the small community reserved for
ecclesiastics whose health did not permit them to follow the
excessive exercises of the seminary. In this famous school, of
which he always retained affectionate memories. Fenelon was
grounded not only in the practice of piety and priestly virtue,
but above all in solid Catholic doctrine, which saved him later
from Jansenism and Gallicanism. Thirty years later, in a letter
to Clement XI, he congratulates himself on his training by M.
Tronson in the knowledge of his Faith and the duties of the
ecclesiastical life. About 1675 he was ordained priest and for a
while thought of devoting himself to the Eastern missions. This
was, however, only a passing inclination. Instead he joined the
commuity of Saint Sulpice and gave himself up to the works of
the priesthood especially preaching and catechizing.
In 1678 Harlay de Champvallon, Archbishop of Paris, entrusted
Fenelon with the direction of the house of
"Nouvelles-Catholiques", a community founded in 1634 by
Archbishop Jean-Franc,ois de Gondi for Protestant young women
about to enter the Church or converts who needed to be
strengthened in the Faith. It was a new and delicate form of
apostolate which thus offered itself to Fenelon's zeal and
required all the resources of his theological knowledge,
persuasive eloquence, and magnetic personality. Within late
years his conduct has been severely criticized, and he has been
even called intolerant but these charges are without serious
foundation and have not been accepted even by the Protestant
authors of the "Encyclopedie des Sciences Religieuses"; their
verdict on Fenelon is that in justice to him it must be said
that in making converts he ever employed persuasion rather than
severity".
When Louis XIV revoked the Edict of Nantes, by which Henry IV
had granted freedom of public worship to the Protestants,
missionaries were chosen from among the greatest orators of the
day, e.g. Bourdaloue, Flechier, and others, and were sent to
those parts of France where heretics were most numerous, to
labour for their conversion. At the suggestion of his friend
Bossuet, Fenelon was sent with five companions to Santonge,
where he manifested great zeal, though his methods were always
tempered by gentleness. According to Cardinal de Bausset, he
induced Louis XIV to remove all troops and all evidences of
compulsion from the places he visited, and it is certain that he
proposed and insisted on many methods of which the king did not
approve. "When hearts are to be moved", he wrote to Seignelay,"
force avails not. Conviction is the only real conversion".
Instead of force he employed patience, established classes, and
distributed New Testaments and catechisms in the vernacular.
Above all, he laid especial emphasis on preaching provided the
sermons were by gentle preachers who have a faculty not only for
instructing but for winning the confidence of their hearers". It
is doubtless true, as recently published documents prove, that
he did not altogether repudiate measures of force, but he only
allowed them as a last resource. Even then his severity was
confined to exiling from their villages a few recalcitrants and
to constraining others under the small penalty of five sous to
attend the religious instructions in the churches. Nor did he
think that preachers ought to advocate openly even these
measures; similarly he was unwilling to have known the Catholic
authorship of pamphlets against Protestant ministers which he
proposed to have printed in Holland. This was certainly an
excess of cleverness; but it proves at least that Fenelon was
not in sympathy with that vague tolerance founded on scepticism
which the eighteenth century rationalists charged him with. In
such matters he shared the opinions of all the other great
Catholics of his day. With Bossuet and St. Augustine he held
that "to be obliged to do good is always an advantage and that
heretics and schismatics, when forced to apply their minds to
the consideration of truth, eventually lay aside their erroneous
beliefs, whereas they would never have examined these matters
had not authority constrained them."
Before and after his mission at Saintonge, which lasted but a
few months (1686-1687), Fenelon formed many dear friendships.
Bossuet was already his friend, the great bishop was at the
summit of his fame, and was everywhere looked up to as the
oracle of the Church of France. Fenelon showed him the utmost
deference, visited him at his country-house at Germany, and
assisted at his spiritual conferences and his lectures on the
Scriptures at Versailles. It was under his inspiration, perhaps
even at his request, that Fenelon wrote about this time his
"Refutation du systeme de Malebranche sur la nature et sur la
grace". In this he attacks with great velour and at length the
theories of the famous Oratorian on optimism, the Creation, and
the Incarnation. This treatise, though annoted by Bousset,
Fenelon considered it unwise to publish; it saw the light only
in 1820. First among the friends of Fenelon at this period were
the Duc de Bauvilliers and the Duc de Chevreuse, two influential
courtiers, eminent for their piety, who had married two
daughters of Colbert, minister of Louis XIV. One of these, the
Duchesse de Beauvilliers, mother of eight daughters, asked
Fenelon for advice concerning their education. His reply was the
"Traite de l'education des filles", in which he insists on
education begining at an early age and on the instruction of
girls in all the duties of their future condition of life. The
religious teaching he recommends is one solid enough to enable
them to refute heresies if necessary. He also advises a more
serious course of studies than was then customary. Girls ought
to be learned without pedantry; the form of instruction should
be concrete, sensible, agreeable, and prudent, in a manner to
aid their natural abilities. In many ways his pedagogy was ahead
of his time, and we may yet learn much from him.
The Duc de Beauvilliers, who had been the first to test in his
own family the value of the "Traite de l'education des filles",
was in 1689 named governor of the grandchildren of Louis XIV. He
hastened to secure Fenelon as tutor to the eldest of these
princes, the Duke of Burgundy. It was a most important post,
seeing that the formation of the future King of France lay in
his hands; but it was not without great difficulties, owing to
the violent, haughty, and character of the pupil. Fenelon
brought to his task a whole-hearted zeal and devotion.
Everything down to, the Latin themes and versions, was made to
serve in the taming of this impetuous spirit. Fenelon prepared
them the better to his plans. With the same object in view, he
wrote his "Fables" and his "Dialogues des Morts", but especially
his "Telemaque", in which work, under the guise of pleasant
fiction, he taught the young prince lessons of self-control, and
all the duties required by his exalted position. The results of
this training were wonderful. The historian Saint-Simon, as a
rule hostile to Fenelon, says: "De cet abime sortit un prince,
affable, doux, modere, humain, patient, humble, tout applique `a
ses devoirs." It has been asked in our day if Fenelon did not
succeed too well. When the prince grew to man's estate, his
piety seemed often too refined; he was continually examining
himself, reasoning for and against, till he was unable to reach
a definite decision, his will being paralysed by fear of doing
the wrong thing. However, these defects of character, against
which Fenelon in his letters was the first to protest, did not
show themselves in youth. About 1695 every one who came in
contact with the prince was in admiration at the change in him.
To reward the tutor, Louis XIV gave him, in 1694, the Abbey of
Saint-Valery, with its annual revenue of fourteen thousand
livres. The Academie had opened its doors to him and Madame de
Maintenon, the morganatic wife of the king, began to consult him
on matters of conscience, and on the regulation of the house of
Saint-Cyr, which she had just established for the training of
young girls. Soon afterwards the archiepiscopal See of Cambrai,
one of the best in France, fell vacant, and the king offered it
to Fenelon, at the same time expressing a wish that he would
continue to instruct the Duke of Burgundy. Nominated in
February, 1696, Fenelon was consecrated in August of the same
year by Bossuet in the chapel of Saint-Cyr. The future of the
young prelate looked brilliant, when he fell into deep disgrace.
The cause of Fenelon's trouble was his connection with Madame
Guyon, whom he had met in the society of his friends, the
Beauvilliers and the Chevreuses. She was a native of Orleans,
which she left when about twenty-eight years old, a widowed
mother of three children, to carry on a sort of apostolate of
mysticism, under the direction of Pere Lacombe, a Barnabite.
After many journeys to Geneva, and through Provence and Italy,
she set forth her ideas in two works, "Le moyen court et facile
de faire oraison" and "Les torrents spirituels". In exaggerated
language characteristic of her visionary mind, she presented a
system too evidently founded on the Quietism of Molinos, that
had just been condemned by Innocent XI in 1687. There were,
however, great divergencies between the two systems. Whereas
Molinos made man's earthly perfection consist in a state of
uninterrupted contemplation and love, which would dispense the
soul from all active virtue and reduce it to absolute inaction,
Madame Guyon rejected with horror the dangerous conclusions of
Molinos as to the cessation of the necessity of offering
positive resistance to temptation. Indeed, in all her relations
with Pere Lacombe, as well as with Fenelon, her virtuous life
was never called in doubt. Soon after her arrival in Paris she
became acquainted with many pious persons of the court and in
the city, among them Madame de Maintenon and the Ducs de
Beauvilliers and Chevreuse, who introduced her to Fenelon. In
turn, he was attracted by her piety, her lofty spirituality, the
charm of her personality, and of her books. It was not long,
however, before the Bishop of Chartres, in whose diocese
Saint-Cyr was, began to unsettle the mind of Madame de Maintenon
by questioning the orthodoxy of Madame Guyon's theories. The
latter, thereupon, begged to have her works submitted to an
ecclesiastical commission composed of Bossuet, de Noailles, who
was then Bishop of Chalons, later Archbishop of Paris, and M.
Tronson; superior of-Saint-Sulpice. After an examination which
lasted six months, the commission delivered its verdict in
thirty-four articles known as the "Articles d' Issy", from the
place near Paris where the commission sat. These articles, which
were signed by Fenelon and the Bishop of Chartres, also by the
members of the commission, condemned very briefly Madame Guyon's
ideas, and gave a short exposition of the Catholic teaching on
prayer. Madame Guyon submitted to the condemnation, but her
teaching spread in England, and Protestants, who have had her
books reprinted have always expressed sympathy with her views.
Cowper translated some of her hymns into English verse; and her
autobiography was translated into English by Thomas Digby
(London, 1805) and Thomas Upam (New York, 1848). Her books have
been long forgotten in France.
In accordance with the decisions taken at Issy, Bossuet now
wrote his instruction on the "Etats d' oraison", as an
explanation of the thirty-four articles. Fenelon refused to sign
it, on the plea that his honour forbade him to condemn a woman
who had already been condemned. To explain his own views of the
"Articles d'Issy", he hastened to publish the "Explication des
Maximes des Saints", a rather arid treatise in forty-five
articles. Each article was divided into two paragraphs, one
laying down the true, the other the false, teaching concerning
the love of God. In this work he undertakes to distinguish
clearly every step in the upward way of the spiritual life. The
final end of the Christian soul is pure love of God, without any
admixture of self-interest, a love in which neither fear of
punishment nor desire of reward has any part. The means to this
end, Fenelon points out, are those Iong since indicated by the
Catholic mystics, i.e. holy indifference, detachment,
self-abandonment, passiveness, through all of which states the
soul is led by contemplation. Fenelon's book was scarcely
published when it aroused much opposition. The king, in
particular, was angry. He distrusted all religious novelties,
and he reproached Bossuet with not having warned him of the
ideas of his grandsons' tutor. He appointed the Bishops of
Meaux, Chartes, and Paris to examine Fenelon's work and select
passages for condemnation, but Fenelon himself submitted the
book to the judgement of Holy See (27 April, 1697). A vigorous
conflict broke out at once, particularly between Bossuet and
Fenelon. Attack and reply followed too fast for analysis here.
The works of Fenelon on the subject fill six volumes, not to
speak of the 646 letters relating to Quietism, the writer
proving himself a skillful polemical writer, deeply versed in
spiritual things, endowed with quick intelligence and a mental
suppleness not always to be clearly distinguished from quibbling
and a straining of the sense. After a long and detailed
examination by the consultors and cardinals of the Holy Office,
lasting over two years and occupyng 132 sessions, "Les Maxims
des Saints" was finally condemned (12 March, 1699) as containing
propositions which, in the obvious meaning of the words, or else
because of the sequence of the thoughts, were "temerarious,
scandalous, ill-sounding, offensive to pious ears, pernicious in
practice, and false in fact". Twenty-three propositions were
selected as having incurred this censure, but the pope by no
means intended to imply that he approved the rest of the book.
Fenelon submitted at once. "We adhere to this brief", he wrote
in a pastoral letter in which he made known Rome's decision to
the flock, "and we accept it not only for the twenty three
propositions but for the whole book, simply, absolutely, and
without a shadow of reservation." Most of his contemporaries
found his submission adequate, edifying and admirable. In recent
times, however, scattered letters have enabled a few critics to
doubt its sincerity. In our opinion a few words written
impulsively, and contradicted by the whole tenor of the
writers's life, cannot justify so grave a charge. It must be
remembered, too, that at the meeting of the bishops held to
receive the Brief of condemnation, Fenelon declared that he laid
aside his own opinion and accepted the judgement of Rome, and
that if this act of submission seemed lacking in any way, he was
ready to do whatever Rome would suggest. The Holy See never
required anything more than the above-mentioned spontaneous act.
Louis XIV, who had done all he could to bring the condemnation
of the "Maximes des Saints", had already punished its author by
ordering him to remain within the limits of his diocese. Vexed
later at the publication of "Telemaque", in which he saw his
person and his government subjected to criticism, the king could
never be prevailed upon to revoke this command. Fenelon
submitted without complaint or regret, and gave himself up
entirely to the care of his flock. With a revenue of two hundred
thousand livres and eight hundred parishes, some of which were
on Spanish territory, Cambrai, which had been regained by France
only in 1678, was one of the most important sees in the kingdom.
Fenelon gave up several months of each year to a visitation of
his archdiocese, which was not even interrupted by the War of
the Spanish Succession, when opposing armies were camped in
various parts of his territory. The captains of these armies,
full of veneration for his Fenelon, left him free to come and go
as he would. The remainder of the year he spent in his episcopal
palace at Cambrai, where with his relatives and his friends, the
Abbes de Langeron, de Chanterac, and de Beaumont, he led an
uneventful life, monastic in its regularity. Every year he gave
a Lenten course in one or other important parish of his diocese,
and on the principal feasts he preached in his own cathedral.
His sermons were short and simple composed after a brief
meditation, and never committed to writing; with the exception
of some few preached on more important occasions, they have not
been preserved. His dealings with his clergy were always marked
by condescension and cordiality. "His priests", says
Saint-Simon, "to whom he made himself both father and brother,
bore him in their hearts." He took a deep interest in their
seminary training, assisted at the examination of those who were
to be ordained, and gave them conferences during their retreat.
He presided over the concursus for benefices and made inquiries
among the pastors concerning the qualifications of each
candidate.
Fenelon was always approachable, and on his walks often
conversed with those he chanced to meet. He loved to visit the
peasants in their houses, interested himself in their joys and
sorrows, and, to avoid paining them, accepted the simple gifts
of their hospitality. During the War of the Spanish Succession
the doors of his palace were open to all the poor who took
refuge in Cambrai. The rooms and stairways were filled with
them, and his gardens and vestibules sheltered their live stock.
He is yet remembered in the vicinity of Cambrai and the peasants
still give their children the name Fenelon, as that of a saint.
Engrossed as Fenelon was with the administration of his diocese,
he never lost sight of the general interests of the Church. This
became evident when Jansenism, quiescent for nearly thirty
years, again raised its head on the occasion of the famous Cas
de Conscience, by which an anonymous writer endeavoured to put
new life into the old distinction between the "question of law"
and "question of fact" (question de droit et question de fait),
acknowledging that the Church could legally condemn the famous
five propositions attributed to Jansenius, but denying that she
could oblige any one to believe that they were really to be
found in the "Augustinus" of that writer. Fenelon multiplied
publications of every kind against the reviving heresy; he wrote
letters, pastoral instruction, memoirs, in French and in Latin,
which fill seven volumes of his works. He set himself to combat
the errors of the Cas de Conscience, to refute the theory known
as "respectful silence", and to enlighten Clement XI on public
opinion in France Pere Quesnel brought fresh fuel to the strife
by his "Reflexions morales sur le Nouveau Testament", which was
solemnly condemned by the Bull "Unigenitus" (1713). Fenelon
defended this famous pontifical constitution in a series of
dialogues intended to influence men of the world. Great as was
his zeal against error, he was always gentle with the erring so
that Saint-Simon could say "The Low Countries swarmed with
Jansenists, and his Diocese of Cambrai, in particular, was full
of them. In both places they found an ever-peaceful refuge, and
were glad and content to here peaceably under one who was their
enemy with his pen. They had no fears of their archbishop, who,
though opposed to their beliefs, did not disturb their
tranquillity."
In spite of the multiplicity of his labours, Fenelon found time
to carry on an absorbing correspondence with his relatives,
friends, priests, and in fact every one who sought his advice.
It is in this mass of correspondence, ten volumes of which have
reached us, that we may see Fenelon as a director of souls.
People of every sphere of life, men and women of the work,
religious, soldiers, courtiers, servants, are here met with,
among them Mesdames de Maintenon, de Gramont, de la Maisonfort,
de Montebron, de Noailles, members of the Colbert family, the
Marquis de Seignelay, the Duc de Chaulnes, above all the Ducs de
Chevreuse and de Beauvilliers, not forgetting the Duke of
Burgundy. Fenelon shows how well he possessed all the qualities
he required from directors, patience, knowledge of the human
heart and the spiritual life, equanimity of disposition,
firmness, and straightforwardness, "together with a quiet
gaiety" altogether removed from any stern or affected
austerity". In return he required docility of mind and entire
submission of will. He aimed at leading souls to the pure love
of God, as far as such a thing is humanly possible, for though
the errors of the "Maximes des Saints" do not reappear in the
letters of direction, it is still the same Fenelon, with the
same tendencies, the same aiming at self-abandonment and
detachment from all personal interests, all kept, however,
within due limits; for as he says "this love of God does not
require all Christians to practice austerities like those of the
ancient solitaries, but merely that they be sober, just, and
moderate in the use of all things expedient"; nor does piety,
"like temporal affairs, exact a long and continuous
application"; "the practice of devotion is in no way
incompatible with the duties of one's state in life". The desire
to teach his disciples the secret of harmonizing the duties of
religion with those of everyday life suggests to Fenelon all
sorts of advice, sometimes most unexpected from the pen of a
director, especially when he happens to be dealing with his
friends at court. This has given occasion to some of his critics
to accuse him of ambition, and of being as anxious to control
the state as to guide souls.
It is especially in the writings intended for the Duke of
Burgundy that his political ideas are apparent. Besides a great
number of letters, he sent him through his friends, the Ducs de
Beauvilliers and de Chevreuse, an "Examen de conscience sur les
devoirs de la Royaute", nine memoirs on the war of the Spanish
Succession, and "Plans de Gouvernement, concretes avec le Duc de
Chevreuse". If we add to this the "Telemaque", the "Lettre `a
Louis XIV", the "Essai sur le Gouvernement civil", and the
"Memoires sur les precautions `a prendre apres la mort du Duc de
Bourgogne", we have a complete exposition of Fenelon's political
ideas. We shall indicate only the points in which they are
original for the period when they were written. Fenelon's ideal
government was a monarchy limited by an aristocracy. The king
was not to have absolute power; he was to obey the laws, which
he was to draw up with the co-operation of the nobility;
extraordinary subsidies were to be levied only with the consent
of the people. At other times he was to be assisted by the
States-General, which was to meet every three years, and by
provincial assemblies, all to be advisory bodies to the king
rather than representative assemblies. The state was to have
charge of education; it was to control public manners by
sumptuary legislation and to forbid both sexes unsuit able
marriages (mesalliances). The temporal arm and the spiritual arm
were to be independent of each other, but to afford mutual
support. His ideal state is outlined with much wisdom in his
political writings are to be found many ohservations remarkably
judicious but also not a little Utopianism.
Fenelon also took much interest in literature and philosophy.
Monsieur Dacier, perpetual secretary to the Academie Franc,aise,
having requested him, in the name of that body, to furnish him
with his views on the works it ought to undertake when the
"Dictionnaire" was finished, Fenelon replied in his "Lettre sur
les occupations de l'Academie Franc,aise", a work still much
admired in France. This letter, which treats of the French
tongue, of rhetoric, poetry, history, and ancient and modern
writers, exhibits a well-balanced mind acquainted with all the
masterpieces of antiquity, alive to the charm of simplicity,
attached to classical traditions yet discreetly open to new
ideas (especially in history), also, however, to some chimerical
theories, at least concerning things poetical. At this very time
the Duc d'Orleans, the future regent was consulting him on quite
different subjects. This prince, a sceptic through circumstances
rather than by any force of reasoning, profited by the
appearance of Fenelon's "Traite de l'existence de Dieu" to ask
its author some questions on the worship due to God, the
immortality of the soul, and free will. Fenelon replied in a
series of letters, only the first three of which are answers to
the difficulties proposed by the prince. Together they form a
continuation of the "Traite de l'existence de Dieu", the first
part of which had been published in 1712 without Fenelon's
knowledge. The second part appeared only in 1718, after its
author's death. Though an almost forgotten work of his youth, it
was received with much approval, and was soon translated into
English and German. It is from his letters and this treatise
that we learn something about the philosophy of Fenelon. It
borrows from both St. Augustine and Descartes. For Fenelon the
strongest arguments for the existence of God were those based on
final causes and on the idea of the infinite, both developed
along broad lines and with much literary charm, rather than with
precision or originality.
Fenelon's last years were saddened by the death of his best
friends. Towards the end of 1710 he lost Abbe de Langeron, his
lifelong companion; in February, 1712, his pupil, the Duke of
Burgundy, died. A few months later the Duc de Chevreuse was
taken away, and the Duc de Beauvilliers followed in August,
1714. Fenelon survived him only a few months, making a last
request to Louis XIV to appoint a successor firm against
Jansenism, and to favour the introduction of Sulpicians into his
seminary. With him disappeared one of the most illustrious
members of the French episcopate, certainly one of the most
attractive men of his age. He owed his success solely to his
great talents and admirable virtues. The renown he enjoyed
during life increased after his death. Unfortunately, however,
his fame among Protestants was largely due to his opposition to
Bossuet, and among the philosophers to the fact that he opposed
and was punished by Louis XIV. Fenelon is therefore for them a
precursor of their own tolerant scepticism and their infidel
philosophy, a forerunner of Rousseau, beside whom they placed
him on the facade of the Pantheon. In our days a reaction has
set in, due to the cult of Bossuet and the publication of
Fenelon's correspondence, which has brought into bolder relief
the contrasts of his character, showing him at once an ancient
and a modern, Christian and profane, a mystic and a statesman,
democrat and aristocrat, gentle and obstinate, frank and subtle.
He would perhaps have seemed more human in our eyes were he a
lesser rnan; nevertheless he remains one of the most attractive,
brilliant, and puzzling figures that the Catholic Church has
ever produced.
The most convenient and best edition of Fenelon's works is that
begun by Lebel at Versailles in 1820 and completed at Paris by
Leclere in 1830. It comprises twenty-two volumes, besides eleven
volumes of letters, in all thirty-three volumes, not including
an index volume. The various works are grouped under five five
headings: (I) Theological and controversial works (Vols. I-XVI),
of which the principal are: "Traite de l'existence et des
attributs de Dieu", letters on various metaphysical and
religious subjects; "Traite du ministere des pasteurs"; "De
Summi Pontificis auctoritate", "Refutation du systeme du P.
Malebranche sur la nature et la grace"; "Lettre `a l'Eveque
d'Arras sur la lecture de l'Ecriture Sainte en langue vulgaire",
works on Quietisin and Jansenism. (2) Works on moral and
spiritual subjects (Vols. XVII and XVIII): "Traite de
l'education des filles"; sermons and works on piety. (3)
Twenty-four pastoral charges (XVIII). (4) Literary works (Vols.
XIX-XXII): "Dialogues des Morts"; "Telemaque"; "Dialogues sur
l'eloquence". (5) Political writings (Vol. XXII): "Examen de
conscience sur les devoirs de la Royaute"; various memoirs on
the War of the Spanish Succession; "Plans du Gouvernement
concertes avec le Duc de Chevreuse". The correspondence includes
letters to friends at court, as Beauvilliers, Chevreuse, and the
Duke of Burgundy; letters of direction, and letters on Quietism.
To these must be added the "Explication des rnaximes des Saints
sur la vie lnterieure" (Paris, 1697).
DE RAMSAY, Histoire de vie et des ouvrages de Fenelon (London,
1723), De BAUSSET, Histoire de Fenelon (Paris. 1808); TABARAND,
Supplement aux histoires de Bossuet et de Fenelon (Paris, 1822),
De BROGLIE, Feneton a Cambrai (Paris, 1884); JANET, Fenelon
(Paris, 1892); CROUSLE, Fenelon et Bossuet (2 vols., Paris,
1894); DRUON, Fenelon archeveque de Cambrai (Paris, 1905);
CAGNAC, Fenelon directeur de conscience (Paris, 1903); BRUNETIRE
in La Grande Encyclopedie, s.v.; IDEM, Etudes critiques sur
l'histoire de la Iitterature franc,aise (Paris, 1893); DOUEN,
L'intolerance de Fenelon (2d ed., Paris,1875); VERLAQUE, Lettres
inedites de Fenelon (Paris, 1874)); IDEM, Fenelon Missionnaire
(Marseilles, 1884); GUERRIER, Madam Guion, sa vie, sa doctrine,
et son influence (Orleans, 1881); MASSON, Fenelon et Madame
Guyon (Paris, 1907): DELPHANQUE, Fenelon et la doctrine de
l'amour pur (Lille, 1907): SCANNELL, Franc,ois Fenelon in lrish
Eccl. Record, XI, (1901) 1-15, 413-432.
ANTOINE DEGERT
John Fenn
John Fenn
Born at Montacute near Wells in Somersetshire; d. 27 Dec., 1615.
He was the eldest brother of Ven. James Fenn, the martyr, and
Robert Fenn, the confessor. After being a chorister at Wells
Cathedral, he went to Winchester School in 1547, and in 1550 to
New College, Oxford, of which he was elected fellow in 1552.
Next year he became head master of the Bury St. Edmunds'
grammar-school, but was deprived of this office and also of his
fellowship for refusing to take the oath of supremacy under
Elizabeth. He thereupon went to Rome where after four years'
study he was ordained priest about 1566. Having for a time been
chaplain to Sir William Stanley's regiment in Flanders he
settled at Louvain, where he lived for forty years. A great and
valuable work to which he contrituted was the publication, in
1583, by Father John Gibbons, S.J., of the various accounts of
the persecution, under the Title "Concertatio Ecclesiae
Catholicae in Anglia", which was the groundwork of the
invaluable larger collection published by Bridgewater under the
same name in 1588. He also collected from old English sources
some spiritual treatises for the Brigettine nuns of Syon. In
1609, when the English Augustinian Canonnesses founded St.
Monica's Priory at Louvain, he became their first chaplain until
in 1611 when his sight failed. Even then he continued to live in
the priory and the nuns tended him till his death. Besides his
"Vitae quorundam Martyrum in Anglia", included in the
"Concertatio", he translated into Latin Blessed John Fisher's
"Treatise on the penitential Psalms" (1597) and two of his
sermons; he also published English versions of the Catechism of
the Council of Trent, Osorio's reply to Haddon's attack on his
letter to Queen Elizabeth (1568), Guerra's "Treatise of
Tribulation", an Italian life of St. Catherine of Sienna (1609;
1867), and Loarte's "Instructions How to Meditate the Misteries
of the Rosarie".
PITS, De Illustribus Angliae Scriptoribus (Paris, 1623); DODD,
Church History (Brussels, 1737-42), I, 510; WOOD, ed. BLISS,
Athenae Oxonienses, II,; GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath., s.v.;
COOPER in Dict. Nat. Biog., s.v.; HAMILTON, Chronicle of the
English Augustinian Canonesses of St. Monica's Louvain (London,
1904).
EDWIN BURTON
Ferber, Nicolaus
Nicolaus Ferber
A Friar Minor and controversialist, born at Herborn, Germany, in
1485; died at Toulouse, 15 April, 1534. He was made provincial
of the Franciscan province of Cologne and was honoured by
Clement VII with the office of vicar-general of that branch of
the order known as the Cismontane Observance, in which capacity
he visited the various provinces of the order in England,
Germany, Spain, and Belgium. At the instance of the bishops of
Denmark, he was called to Copenhagen to champion the Catholic
cause against Danish Lutheranism, and there he composed, in
1530, the "Confutatio Lutheranismi Danici", first edited by L.
Schmitt, S.J., and published at Quaracchi (1902), which earned
for him the sobriquet of Stagefyr (fire-brand). Ferber's
principal work is entitled: "Locorum communium adversus hujus
temporis haereses Enchiridion", published at Cologne in 1528,
with additions in 1529. Besides this he wrote "Assertiones
CCCXXV adversus Fr. Lamberti paradoxa impia" etc. (Cologne,
1526, and Paris, 1534); and "Enarrationes latinae Evangeliorum
quadragesimalium", preached in German and published in Latin
(Antwerp, 1533).
SCHMITT. Der Koelner Theolog Nicolaus Stagefyr und der
Franziskaner Nicolaus Herborn (Freiburg, 1896); HURTER,
Nomenclator (Innsbruck, 1906), II, 1255-56; SBARALEA,
Supplementum ad scriptores Ordinis Menorum, 556.
STEPHEN M. DONOVAN.
Blessed Ferdinand
Blessed Ferdinand
Prince of Portugal, b. in Portugal, 29 September, 1402; d. at
Fez, in Morocco, 5 June, 1443. He was one of five sons, his
mother being Philippa, daughter of John of Gaunt, Duke of
Lancaster, and his father King John I, known in history for his
victories over the Moors and in particular for his conquest of
Ceuta, a powerful Moorish stronghold, and his establishment of
an episcopal see within its walls. In early life Ferdinand
suffered much from sickness, but bodily weakness did not hinder
his growth in spirit, and even in his boyhood and youth he gave
evidence of remarkable qualities of soul and intellect. With
great strength of character and a keen sense of justice and
order he combined an innocence, gentleness, and charity which
excited the wonder of the royal court. He had a special
predilection for prayer and for the ceremonies and devotions of
the Church. After his fourteenth year he recited daily the
canonical hours, rising at midnight for Matins. Always severe
with himself, he was abstemious in his diet and fasted on
Saturdays and on the eves of the feasts of the Church. He cared
for the spiritual as well as the corporal necessities of his
domestics, while his solicitude for the poor and oppressed was
unbounded. His generosity towards the monasteries was impelled
by his desire to share in their prayers and good works. He had
himself enrolled for the same reason in all the pious
congregations of the kingdom.
Upon the death of his father in 1433, his brother Edward
(Duarte) ascended the throne, while he himself received but a
small inheritance. It was then that he was induced to accept the
grand-mastership of Aviz, in order that he might be better able
to help the poor. As he was not a cleric, his brother, the king,
obtained for him the necessary papal dispensation. The fame of
his charity went abroad, and Pope Eugene IV, through the papal
legate, offered him the cardinal's hat. This he refused, not
wishing, as he declared, to burden his conscience.
Though living a life of great sanctity in the midst of the
court, Ferdinand was not a mere recluse. He was also a man of
action, and in his boyhood his soul was stirred by the heroic
campaign against Ceuta. His mother, the queen, had nurtured the
martial spirit of her sons, and it is even said that on her
deathbed she gave them each a sword, charging them to use it in
defence of widows, orphans, and their country, and in particular
against unbelievers. An opportunity soon presented itself. In
1437 Edward planned an expedition against the Moors in Africa
and placed his brothers Henry and Ferdinand in command. They set
sail 22 Aug., 1437, and four days later arrived at Ceuta. During
the voyage Ferdinand became dangerously ill, in consequence of
an abcess and fever which he had concealed before the departure,
in order not to delay the fleet. Through some mismanagement the
Portuguese numbered only 6000 men, instead of 14,000, as ordered
by the king. Though advised to wait for reinforcements, the two
princes, impatient for the fray, advanced towards Tangiers, to
which they lay siege. Ferdinand recovered slowly, but was not
able to take part in the first battle.
The Portuguese fought bravely against great odds, but were
finally compelled to make terms with the enemy, agreeing to
restore Ceuta in return for a safe passage to their vessels. The
Moors likewise demanded that one of the princes be delivered
into their hands as a hostage for the delivery of the city.
Ferdinand offered himself for the dangerous post, and with a few
faithful followers, including Joao Alvarez, his secretary and
later his biographer, began a painful captivity which ended only
with his death. He was first brought to Arsilla by Sal`a ben
Sal`a, the Moorish ameer. In spite of sickness and bodily
sufferings, he continued all his devotions and showed great
charity towards his Christian fellow-captives. Henry at first
repaired to Ceuta, where he was joined by his brother John.
Realizing that it would be difficult to obtain the royal consent
to the restoration of the fortress, they proposed to exchange
their brother for the son of Sal`a ben Sal`a, whom Henry held as
a hostage. The Moor scornfully rejected the proposal, and both
returned to Portugal to devise means of setting the prince free.
Though his position was perilous in the extreme, the Portuguese
Cortes refused to surrender Ceuta, not only on account of the
treachery of the Moors, but because the place had cost them so
dearly and might serve as a point of departure for future
conquests. It was resolved to ransom him if possible. Sal`a ben
Sal`a refused all offers, his purpose being to recover his
former seat of government.
Various attempts were made to free the prince, but all proved
futile and only served to make his lot more unbearable. On 25
May, 1438, he was sent to Fez and handed over to the cruel
Lazurac, the king's vizier. He was first condemned to a dark
dungeon and, after some months of imprisonment, was compelled to
work like a slave in the royal gardens and stables. Amid insult
and misery Ferdinand never lost patience. Though often urged to
seek safety in flight, he refused to abandon his companions and
grieved more for their sufferings, of which he considered
himself the cause, than for his own. His treatment of his
persecutors was respectful and dignified, but he would not
descend to flattery to obtain any alleviation of his sufferings.
During the last fifteen months of his life he was confined alone
in a dark dungeon with a block of wood for his pillow and the
stone floor for a bed. He spent most of his time in prayer and
in preparation for death, which his rapidly failing health
warned him was near at hand. In May, 1443, he was stricken with
the fatal disease to which he finally succumbed. His persecutors
refused to change his loathsome abode, although they allowed a
physician and a few faithful friends to attend him. On the
evening of 5 June, after making a general confession and a
profession of faith, he peacefully gave up his soul to God.
During the day he had confided to his confessor, who frequently
visited him, that the Blessed Virgin with St. John and the
Archangel Michael had appeared to him in a vision. Lazurac
ordered the body of the prince to be opened and the vital organs
removed, and then caused it to be suspended head downwards for
four days on the walls of Fez. Nevertheless he was compelled to
pay tribute to the constancy, innocence, and spirit of prayer of
his royal victim. Of Ferdinand's companions, four shortly
afterwards followed him to the grave, one joined the ranks of
the Moors, and the others regained their liberty after Lazurac's
death. One of the latter, Joao Alvarez, his secretary and
biographer, carried his heart to Portugal in 1451, and in 1473
his body was brought to Portugal, and laid to rest in the royal
vault at Batalha amid imposing ceremonies.
Prince Ferdinand has ever been held in great veneration by the
Portuguese on account of his saintly life and devotion to
country. Miracles are said to have been wrought at his
intercession, and in 1470 he was beatified by Paul II. Our chief
authority for the details of his life is Joao Alvarez, already
referred to. Calderon made him a hero of one of his most
remarkable dramas, "El Principe Constante y Martir de Portugal".
Alvarez, in Acta SS., June, I; Olfers, Leben des
standhaften Prinzen (Berlin, 1827); Dunham, History of Spain and
Portugal (New York), III.
Henry M. Brock
Ferdinand II
Ferdinand II
Emperor, eldest son of Archduke Karl and the Bavarian Princess
Maria, b. 1578; d. 15 February, 1637. In accordance with
Ferdinand I's disposition of his possessions, Styria, Carinthia,
and Carniola fell to his son Karl. As Karl died in 1590, when
his eldest son was only twelve years old, the government of
these countries had to be entrusted to a regent during the
minority of Ferdinand. The latter began his studies under the
Jesuits at Graz, and continued them in company with Maximilian
of Bavaria at the University of Ingolstadt, also in charge of
the Jesuits. According to the testimony of his professors, he
displayed remarkable diligence, made rapid progress in the
mathematical sciences, and above all gave evidence of a deeply
religious spirit. On the completion of his studies, he took up
the reins of government, although not yet quite seventeen.
During a subsequent visit to Italy he made a vow in the
sanctuary of Loreto to banish all heresy from the territories
which might fall under his rule. He was of middle height,
compact build, with reddish-blonde hair and blue eyes. His dress
and the cut of his hair suggested the Spaniard, but his easy
bearing towards all with whom he came into contact was rather
German than Spanish. Even in the heat of conflict, a sense of
justice and equity never deserted him. On two occasions, when
his tenure of power was imperilled, he was unflinching and
showed a true greatness of mind. Ferdinand was a man of
unspotted morals, but lacking in statesman-like qualities and
independence of judgment. He was wont to lay the responsibility
for important measures on his counsellors (Freiherr von
Eggenberg, Graf von Harrach, the Bohemian Chancellor, Zdencko
von Lobkowitz, Cardinal-Prince Dietrichstein, etc.). Liberal
even to prodigality, his exchequer was always low. In pursuance
of the principle laid down by the Diet of Augsburg, 1555 (cuius
regio eius et religio), he established the Counter-Reformation
in his three duchies, while his cousin Emperor Rudolf II
reluctantly recognized the Reformation.
As Ferdinand was the only archduke of his day with sufficient
power and energy to take up the struggle against the estates
then aiming at supreme power in the Austrian hereditary domains,
the childless Emperor Matthias strove to secure for him the
succession to the whole empire. During Matthias's life,
Ferdinand was crowned King of Bohemia and of Hungary, but, when
Matthias died during the heat of the religious war (20 March,
1619), Ferdinand's position was encompassed with perils. A
united army of Bohemians and Silesians stood before the walls of
Vienna; in the city itself Ferdinand was beset by the urgent
demands of the Lower-Austrian estates, while the Bohemian
estates chose as king in his place the head of the Protestant
Union in Germany (the Palatine Frederick V), who could also
count on the support of his father-in-law, James I of England.
When the Austrian estates entered into an alliance with the
Bohemians, and Bethlen Gabor, Prince of Transylvania, marched
triumphantly through Hungary with the assistance of the
Hungarian evangelical party, and was crowned king of that
country, the end of the Hapsburg dynasty seemed at hand.
Notwithstanding these troubles in his hereditary states,
Ferdinand was chosen German Emperor by the votes of all the
electors except Bohemia and the Palatinate. Spaniards from the
Netherlands occupied the Palatinate, and the Catholic League
(Bund der katholischen Fuersten Deutschlands) headed by
Maximilian of Bavaria declared in his favour, although to
procure this support Ferdinand was obliged to mortgage Austria
to Maximilian. On 22 June, 1619, the Imperial General Buquoy
repulsed from Vienna the besieging General Thurn; Mansfeld was
crushed at Budweis, and on 8 November, 1620, the fate of Bohemia
and of Frederick V was decided by the Battle of the White
Mountain, near Prague.
The firm re-establishment of the Hapsburg dynasty was the signal
for the introduction of the Counter-Reformation into Bohemia.
Ferdinand annulled the privileges of the estates, declared void
the concessions granted to the Bohemian Protestants by the
Majestaetsbrief of Rudolf II, and punished the heads of the
insurrection with death and confiscation of goods. Protestantism
was exterminated in Bohemia, Moravia, and Lower Austria; in
Silesia alone, on the intercession of the Lutheran Elector of
Saxony, the Reformers were treated with less severity.
The establishment of a general peace might perhaps now have been
possible, if the emperor had been prepared to return his
possessions to the outlawed and banished Palatine Elector
Frederick. At first, Ferdinand seemed inclined to adopt this
policy out of consideration for the Spanish, who did not wish to
give mortal offence to James I, the father-in-law of the
elector. However, the irritating conduct of Frederick and the
Protestant Union, and the wish to recover Austria by
indemnifying Maximilian in another way led Ferdinand to continue
the war. Entrusted with the execution of the ban against the
Elector Palatine, Maximilian assisted by the Spaniards took
possession of the electoral lands, and in 1632 was himself
raised to the electoral dignity.
Uneasy at the rapidly increasing power of the emperor, the
estates of the Lower Saxon circle (Kreis) had meanwhile formed a
confederation, and resolved under the leadership of their head,
King Christian IV of Denmark to oppose the emperor (1625). In
face of this combination, the Catholic Union or League under
Count Tilly proved too weak to hold in check both its internal
and external enemies; thus the recruiting of an independent
imperial army was indispensable, though the Austrian exchequer
was unable to meet the charge. However, Albrecht von Waldstein
(usually known as Wallenstein), a Bohemian nobleman whom
Ferdinand had a short time previously raised to the dignity of
prince, offered to raise an army of 40,000 men at his own
expense. His offer was accepted, and soon Wallenstein and Tilly
repeatedly vanquished the Danes, Ernst von Mansfeld and
Christian of Brunswick, the leaders of the Protestant forces. On
the defeat of Christian at Lutter am Barenberge (27 August,
1626), the Danish Duchies of Schleswig and Holstein fell into
the hands of the victorious Tilly, Christian was compelled to
make the equitable peace of Luebeck on 12 May, 1629, and
Wallenstein was invested with the lands of the Dukes of
Mecklenburg, allies of Christian.
Contemporaneously, an insurrection broke out among the Austrian
peasants for the recovery of their ecclesiastical rights
abrogated by the emperor. This rising was soon quelled, but, as
Wallenstein did not conceal his intention to establish the
emperor's rule in Germany on a more absolute basis, the princes
of the empire were unceasing in their complaints, and demanded
Wallenstein's dismissal. The excitement of the princes,
especially those of the Protestant faith, ran still higher when
Ferdinand published, in 1629, the "Edict of Restitution", which
directed Protestants to restore all ecclesiastical property
taken from the Catholics since the Convention of Passau, in
1552(2 archbishoprics, 12 bishoprics and many monastic
seigniories, especially in North Germany). At the meeting of the
princes in Ratisbon (1630), when Ferdinand wished to procure the
election of his son as King of Rome, the princes headed by
Maximilian succeeded in prevailing on the emperor to remove
Wallenstein. The command of the now reduced imperial troops was
entrusted to Tilly, who with these forces and those of the
League marched against Magdeburg; this city, formerly the see of
an archbishop, energetically opposed the execution of the Edict
of Restitution. Even before Wallenstein's dismissal on 4 July,
1630, Gustavus Adolphus, King of Sweden, had landed at the mouth
of the Oder, but, as the Protestant estates (notable Brandenburg
and Saxony) hesitated to enter into an alliance with him, he was
unable at first to accomplish anything decisive. When, however,
in May, 1631, Tilly stormed and reduced to ashes the town of
Magdeburg, the Electors of Brandenburg and Saxony openly
espoused the cause of Gustavus Adolphus. After the utter defeat
of Tilly at Breitenfeld (September, 1631), Gustavus Adolphus
advanced through Thuringia and Franconia to the Rhine, while the
Saxon army invaded Bohemia and occupied its capital, Prague. In
1632, the Swedish King invaded Bavaria. Tilly faced him on the
Lech, but was defeated, and mortally wounded. Gustavus Adolphus
was now master of Germany, the League was overthrown, and the
emperor threatened in his hereditary domain. In this crisis
Ferdinand induced Wallenstein to raise another army of 40,000
men, and entrusted him with unlimited authority. On 6 November,
1632, a battle was fought at Luetzen near Leipzig, where
Gustavus Adolphus was slain, though the Swedish troops remained
masters of the battle-field. Wallenstein was now in a position
to continue the war with energy, but after the second half of
1633 he displayed an incomprehensible inactivity. The
explanation is that Wallenstein had formed the resolution to
betray the emperor, and, with the help of France, to seize
Bohemia. His plan miscarried, however, and led to his
assassination at Eger on 25 February, 1634. The emperor had no
hand in this murder. On 27 August of the same year, the imperial
army under the emperor's eldest son, Ferdinand, inflicted so
crushing a defeat on the Swedes at Noerdlingen that the
Protestants of south-western Germany turned for help to France.
On 30 May, 1636, by the cession of both Upper and Lower Lausitz,
Ferdinand became reconciled with Saxony, which became his ally.
On 24 September, the combined imperial and Saxon armies were
defeated at Wittstock by the Swedes under Baner. France now
revealed its real policy, and dispatched a powerful army to join
the ranks of the emperor's foes. Ferdinand lived to witness the
election of his son as German Emperor (22 December, 1636), and
his coronation as King of Bohemia and Hungary. He died, however,
15 February, 1637, without witnessing the end of this
destructive conflict, known as the Thirty Years War. In his
will, he expressly provided for the succession of the first-born
of is house and the indivisibility of his hereditary states.
HURTER, Geschichte Kaiser Ferdinands II und seiner Zeit (11
vols. Schaffhausen, 1850-1864); GINDELY, Geschichte de
dreissigjaehrigen Krieges (3 vols., Prague, 1882); KLOPP, Tilly
im dreissigjaehrigen Kriege (2 vols., Stuttgart, 1861); HUBER,
Geschichte Oesterreichs (5 vols., Prague and Leipzig, 1894).
KARL KLAAR
St. Ferdinand III
St. Ferdinand III
King of Leon and Castile, member of the Third Order of St.
Francis, born in 1198 near Salamanca; died at Seville, 30 May,
1252. He was the son of Alfonso IX, King of Leon, and of
Berengeria, the daughter of Alfonso III, King of Castile, and
sister of Blanche, the mother of St. Louis IX.
In 1217 Ferdinand became King of Castile, which crown his mother
renounced in his favour, and in 1230 he succeeded to the crown
of Leon, though not without civil strife, since many were
opposed to the union of the two kingdoms. He took as his
counsellors the wisest men in the State, saw to the strict
administration of justice, and took the greatest care not to
overburden his subjects with taxation, fearing, as he said, the
curse of one poor woman more than a whole army of Saracens.
Following his mother's advice, Ferdinand, in 1219, married
Beatrice, the daughter of Philip of Swabia, King of Germany, one
of the most virtuous princesses of her time. God blessed this
union with seven children: six princes and one princess. The
highest aims of Ferdinand's life were the propagation of the
Faith and the liberation of Spain from the Saracen yoke. Hence
his continual wars against the Saracens. He took from them vast
territories, Granada and Alicante alone remaining in their power
at the time of his death. In the most important towns he founded
bishoprics, reestablished Catholic worship everywhere, built
churches, founded monasteries, and endowed hospitals. The
greatest joys of his life were the conquests of Cordova (1236)
and Seville (1248). He turned the great mosques of these places
into cathedrals, dedicating them to the Blessed Virgin. He
watched over the conduct of his soldiers, confiding more in
their virtue than in their valour, fasted strictly himself, wore
a rough hairshirt, and often spent his nights in prayer,
especially before battles. Amid the tumult of the camp he lived
like a religious in the cloister. The glory of the Church and
the happiness of his people were the two guiding motives of his
life. He founded the University of Salamanca, the Athens of
Spain. Ferdinand was buried in the great cathedral of Seville
before the image of the Blessed Virgin, clothed, at his own
request, in the habit of the Third Order of St. Francis. His
body, it is said, remains incorrupt. Many miracles took place at
his tomb, and Clement X canonized him in 1671. His feast is kept
by the Minorites on the 30th of May.
FERDINAND HECKMANN
Diocese of Ferentino
Diocese of Ferentino
(FERENTINUM)
In the province of Rome, immediately subject to the Holy See.
The town was in antiquity the chief place of the Hernici. Its
ancient origin is borne out by the numerous remains of its
cyclopean walls, especially near the site of the ancient
fortress where the cathedral now stands. In the days of the
kings there was strife between Rome and Ferentinum which then
belonged to the Volscians. The Consul Furius gave it over to the
Hernici, and in 487, A.U.C., it became a Roman town
(municipium), and shared thenceforth the fortunes of Rome. Local
legend attributes the first preaching of the Gospel in
Ferentinum to Sts. Peter and Paul; they are said to have
consecrated St. Leo as its first bishop. In the persecution of
Diocletian the centurion Ambrose suffered martyrdom (304) at
Ferentino; possibly also the martyrdom of St. Eutychius belongs
to that period. In the time of Emperor Constantine the town had
its own bishop; but the first known to us by the name is Bassus,
present at Roman synods, 487 and 492-493. St. Redemptus (about
570) is mentioned in the "Dialogues" of St. Gregory the Great;
and he also refers to a Bishop Boniface. Other known bishops are
Trasmondo Sognino (1150), who died in prison; Ubaldo (1150),
Iegate of Adrian IV to the princes of Christendom in favour of a
crusade, later the consecrator of the antipope Victor IV;
Giacomo (A.D. 1276), legate of John XXI to Emperor Michael
Palaeologus; Landolfo Rosso (1297), who rendered good service to
Boniface VIII; Francesco Filippesio (1799), legate of Julius II
to the Emperor Maximilian.
Ferentino has (1909) 19 parishes and 45,000 souls, 3 boys' and 2
girls' Schools; 6 monasteries for men; and 8 convents tor women.
U. BENIGNI
Sts. Fergus
Sts. Fergus
St. Fergus Cruithneach
Died about 730, known in the Irish martyrologies as St. Fergus
Cruithneach, or the Pict. The Breviary of Aberdeen states that
he had been a bishop for many years in Ireland when he came on a
mission to Alba with some chosen priests and other clerics. He
settled first near Strageath, in the present parish of Upper
Strathearn, in Upper Perth, erected three churches in that
district. The churchs of Strageath, Blackford, and Dolpatrick
are found there to-day dedicated to St. Patrick. He next
evangelized Caithness and established there the churches of Wick
and Halkirk. Thence he crossed to Buchan in Aberdeenshire and
founded a church at Lungley, a village now called St. Fergus.
Lastly, he established a church at Glammis in Forfarshire. He
went to Rome in 721 and was present with Sedulius and twenty
other bishops at a synod in the basilica of St. Peter, convened
by Gregory II. His remains were deposited in the church of
Glammis and were the object of much veneration in the Middle
Ages. The Abbot of Scone transferred his head to Scone church,
and encased it in a costly shrine there is an entry in the
accounts of the treasurer of James IV, October, 1503, " An
offerand of 13 shillings to Sanct Fergus' heide in Scone". The
churches of Wick, Glammis, and Lungley had St. Fergus as their
patron. His festival is recorded in the Martyrology of Tallaght
for the 8th of September but seems to have been observed in
Scotland on the 18th of November.
St. Fergus, Bishop of Duleek
Died 778, mentioned by Duald MacFirbis, Annals of the Four
Masters, Annals of Ulster.
St. Fergus, Bishop of Downpatrick
Died 583. He was sixth in descent from Coelbad, King of Erin. He
built a church or monastery called Killmbain, identified by some
as Killyban, Co. Down, and afterwards was consecrated bishop and
ruled the cathedral church of Druimleithglais (Down). He was
probably the first bishop of that see. His feast is kept on the
30th of March.
Ten saints of this name are mentioned in the martyology of
Donegal.
C. MULCAHY
Feria
Feria
(Lat. for "free day").
A day on which the people, especially the slaves, were not
obliged to work, and on which there were no court sessions. In
ancient Roman times the feriae publicae, legal holidays, were
either stativae, recurring regularly (e.g. the Saturnalia),
conceptivae, i.e. movable, or imperativae, i.e. appointed for
special occasions. When Christianity spread, the feriae were
ordered for religious rest, to celebrate the feasts instituted
for worship by the Church. The faithful were obliged on those
days to attend Mass in their parish church; such assemblies
gradually led to mercantile enterprise, partly from necessity
and partly for the sake of convenience. This custom in time
introduced those market gatherings which the Germans call
Messen, and the English call fairs. They were fixed on saints'
days (e.g. St. Barr's fair, St. Germanus's fair, St. Wenn's
fair, etc.)
Today the term feria is used to denote the days of the week with
the exception of Sunday and Saturday. Various reasons are given
for this terminology. The Roman Breviary, in the sixth lesson
for 31 Dec., says that Pope St. Silvester ordered the
continuance of the already existing custom "that the clergy,
daily abstaining from earthly cares, would be free to serve God
alone". Others believe that the Church simply Christianized a
Jewish practice. The Jews frequently counted the days from their
Sabbath, and so we find in the Gospels such expressions as una
Sabbati and prima Sabbati, the first from the Sabbath. The early
Christians reckoned the days after Easter in this fashion, but,
since all the days of Easter week were holy days, they called
Easter Monday, not the first day after Easter, but the second
feria or feast day; and since every Sunday is the dies Dominica,
a lesser Easter day, the custom prevailed to call each Monday a
feria secunda, and so on for the rest of the week.
The ecclesiastical style of naming the week days was adopted by
no nation except the Portuguese who alone use the terms Segunda
Feria etc. The old use of the word feria, for feast day, is
lost, except in the derivative feriatio, which is equivalent to
our of obligation. Today those days are called ferial upon which
no feast is celebrated. Feriae are either major or minor. The
major, which must have at least a commemoration, even on the
highest feasts, are the feriae of Advent and Lent, the Ember
days, and the Monday of Rogation week; the others are called
minor. Of the major feriae Ash Wednesday and the days of Holy
Week are privileged so that their office must be taken, no
matter what feast may occur.
FRANCIS MERSHMAN
Jean-Baptiste-Antoine Ferland
Jean-Baptiste-Antoine Ferland
A French Canadian historian, b. at Montreal, 25 December, 1805;
d. at Quebec, 11 January, 1865. He studied at the college of
Nicolet and was ordained 1828. He ministered to country parishes
until 1841, when he was made director of studies in the college
of Nicolet. He became its superior in 1848. Being named a member
of the council of the Bishop of Quebec, he took up his residence
in that city, where he was also chaplain to the English
garrison. From his college days he had devoted himself to the
study of Canadian history; the numerous notes which he collected
had made him one of the most learned men of the country. It was
not, however, until he had reached the age of forty that he
thought of writing a history of Canada. In 1853 he published his
"Observations sur l' histoire ecclesiastique du Canada", a
refutation and criticism of the work of the Abbe Brasseur de
Bourburg; it was reprinted in France in 1854. In the latter year
he published "Notes sur les registres de Notre Dame de Quebec",
a second edition of which, revised and augmented appeared in the
"Foyer canadien" for 1863. In 1855 he was appointed professor of
Canadian history at the University of Laval (Quebec), and went
at once to France to collect new documents to perfect him in his
work. He returned in 1857, bringing with him valuable notes. The
public courses which he delivered from 1858 to 1862 attracted
large audiences, and his lectures, printed as "Cours d' Histoire
du Canada", established Ferland's reputation. The first volume
appeared in 1861; the second was not published till after the
author's death in 1865. This work, written in a style at once
simple and exact, is considered authoritative by competent
judges. It is, however, incomplete, ending as it does with the
conquest of Canada by the English (1759). Ferland aimed above
all at establishing the actual facts of history. He desired also
to make known the work of the Catholic missions. His judgments
are correct and reliable. Ferland also published in the "Soirees
Canadiennes" of 1863 the "Journal d'un voyage sur les cotes de
la Gaspesie", and in "Litterature Canadienne" for 1863 an "Etude
sur le Labrador", which had previously appeared in the "Annales
de l'Association pour la Propagation de la Foi". For the "Foyer
Canadien" of 1863 he wrote a "Vie de Mgr Plessis", Bishop of
Quebec, translated later into English.
J. EDMOND ROY
Archdiocese of Fermo
Archdiocese of Fermo
(FIRMANA).
In the province of Ascoli Piceno (Central Italy). The great
antiquity of the episcopal city is attested by the remains of
its cyclopean walls. It was the site of a Roman colony,
established in 264 B.C., consisting of 6000 men. With the
Pentapolis it passed in the eighth century under the authority
of the Holy See and underwent thenceforth the vicissitudes of
the March of Ancona. Under the predecessors of Honorius III the
bishops of city became the counts, and later princes, of Fermo.
In the contest between the Hohenstaufen and the papacy, Fermo
was several times besieged and captured; in 1176 by Archbishop
Christian of Mainz, in 1192 by Henry Vl, in 1208 by Marcuald,
Duke of Ravenna, in 1241 by Frederick 11, in 1245 by Manfred.
After this it was governed by different lords, who ruled as more
or less legitimate vassals of the Holy See, e.g. the Monteverdi,
Giovanni Visconti, and Francesco Storza (banished 1446),
Oliverotto Uffreducci (murdered in 1503 by Caesar Borgia), who
was succeeded by his son Ludovico, killed at the battle of Monto
Giorgio in 1520, when Fermo became again directly subjected to
the Holy See. Boniface VIII (1204-1303) established a university
there. Fermo is the birth place of the celebrated poet, Annibale
Caro.
Local legend attributes the first preaching of the Gospel at
Fermo to Sts. Apollinarius and Maro. The martyrdom of the
bishop, St. Alexander, with seventy companions, is placed in the
persecution of Decius (250), and the martyrdom of St. Philip
under Aurelian (270-75). Among the noteworthy bishops are:
Passinus, the recipient of four letters from Gregory III;
Cardinal Domenico Caspranica (1426): Sigismondo Zanettini
(1584), under whom Fermo was made the seat of an archdiocese;
Giambattista Rinuccini, nuncio in Ireland; and Alessandro
Borgia. The suffragans of Fermo are Macerata-Tolentino,
Montalto, Ripatransone, and San Severino. The archdiocese has
(1908) a population of 18,000; 117 parishes; 368 secular priests
and 86 regular; 2 male and 5 female educational institutions; 6
religious houses of men and 50 of women; and a Catholic weekly,
the "Voce delle Marche".
U. BENIGNI
Antonio Fernandez
Antonio Fernandez
A Jesuit missionary; b. at Lisbon, c. 1569; d. at Goa, 12
November, 1642. About 1602 he was sent to India, whence two
years later he went to Abyssinia, where he soon won favour with
King Melek Seghed. This monarch, converted to the Faith in 1622,
after the arrival of the Latin patriarch, for whom he had
petitioned the Holy See, publcly acknowledged the primacy of the
Roman See and constituted Catholicism the State religion (1626).
For a time innumerable conversions were made, the monarch in his
zeal resorting even to compulsory measures. The emperor's son,
however, took sides with the schismatics, headed a rebellion,
seized his father's throne, and reinstalled the former faith
proscribing the Catholic religion under the penalty of death.
The missionaries, on their expulsion, found a temporary
protector in one of the petty princes of the country, by whom,
however, they were soon abandoned. Those who reached the port of
Massowah were held for a ransom. Father Fernandez, then over
eighty years of age, was one of those detained as hostage, but a
younger companion persuaded the pasha to substitute him, and
Father Fernandez was allowed to return to India, where he ended
his days. On his missions for the king, Father Fernandez had
traversed vast tracts of hitherto unexplored territory. He
translated various liturgical books into Ethiopian, and was the
author of ascetical and polemical works against the heresies
prevalent in Ethiopia.
F.M. RUDGE
Juan Fernandez
Juan Fernandez
A Jesuit lay brother and missionary; b. at Cordova; d. 12 June,
1567, in Japan. In a letter from Malacca, dated 20 June, 1549,
St. Francis Xavier begs the prayers of the Goa brethren for
those about to start on the Japanese mission mentioning among
them Juan Fernandez, a lay brother. On their arrival in Japan
Juan rendered active service in the work of evangelizing. In
September, 1550, he accompanied St. Francis to Firando (Hirado),
thence to Amanguchi (Yamaguchi), and on to Miako (Saikio) a
difficult journey, from which they returned to Amanguchi, where
he was left with Father Cosmo Torres in charge of the
Christians, when Francis started for China. There is still in
the records of the Jesuit college at Coimbra a lengthy document
professed to be the translation of an account rendered St.
Francis by Ferndndez of a controversy with the Japanese on such
questions as the nature of God, creation, the nature and
immortality of the soul. The success of Brother Fernandez on
this occasion in refuting his Japanese adversaries resulted in
the ill will of the bonzes, who stirred up a rebellion against
the local prince, who had become a Christian. The missionaries
were concealed by the wife of one of the nobles until they were
able to resume their work of preaching. St. Francis says in one
of his letters: "Joann Fernandez though a simple layman, is most
useful on account of the fluency of his acquaintance with the
Japanese language and of the aptness and clearness with which he
translates whatever Father Cosmo suggests to him." His humility
under insults impressed all and on one occasion resulted in the
conversion of a brilliant young Japanese doctor, who later
became a Jesuit and one of the shining lights in the Japanese
Church. Brother Fernandez compiled the first Japanese grammar
and lexicon.
F.M. RUDGE
Diego Fernandez de Palencia
Diego Fernandez de Palencia
A Spanish conqueror and historian; b. at Palencia in the early
part of the sixteenth century. He took up a military career, and
went to Peru shortly after the conquest (about 1545). In 1553
and 1554 he took part in the civil struggle among the Spaniards,
fighting under the banner of Alonso de Alvarado, Captain-General
of Los Charcos, against the rebel Francisco Hernandez de Giron.
In 1555 Hurtado de Mendoza, Marquess of Canete, came to Peru as
viceroy, and charged Fernandez to write a history of the
troubles in which he had just taken part. He then began his
history of Peru, and later, when he had returned to Spain, upon
the suggestion of Sandoval, President of the Council of the
Indies, Fernandez enlarged the scope of his work, and added to
it a first part, dealing with the movements of Pizarro and his
followers. The whole work was published under the title "Primera
y segunda parte de la Historia del Peru (Seville, 1571). Having
taken part in many of the events, and known the men who figured
in most of the scenes which he describes, Fernandez may be
regarded as a historian whose testimony is worth consideration.
Garcilaso de la Vega, the Peruvian, who quotes long passages
from Fernandez, fiercely attacks his story and accuses him of
partiality and of animosity against certain personages. Whatever
the reason may have been, however, possibly because of the truth
of the story, the fact is, the Council of the Indies prohibited
the printing and sale of the book in the provinces under its
jurisdiction. A perusal of the book conveys the impression that
Fernandez was a man of sound judgment, who set down the fact
only after a thorough investigation. The reproaches of the Inca
historian may, therefore, be regarded as without foundation.
VENTURA FUENTES
Diocese of Ferns
Ferns
DIOCESE OF FERNS (FERNENSIS).
Diocese in the province of Leinster (Ireland), suffragan of
Dublin. It was founded by St. Aedan, whose name is popularly
known as Moaedhog, or "My dear little Aedh", in 598.
Subsequently, St. Aedan was given a quasi-supremacy over the
other bishops of Leinster, with the title of Ard-Escop or chief
bishop, on which account he and some of his successors have been
regarded as having archiepiscopal powers. The old annalists
style the see Fearna-mor Maedhog, that is "the great plain of
the alder trees of St. Moedhog. Even yet Moedhog (Mogue) -- the
Irish endearing form of Aedan -- is a familiar Christian name in
the diocese, while it is also perpetuted Tubbermogue,
Bovlavogue, Cromogue, Island (Breacc Maedoig) are seen in the
National Museum, Dublin. Many of his successors find a place in
Irish martyrologies, including St. Mochua, St. Moling and St.
Cillene. Of these the most famous is St. Moling, who died 13
May, 697. His book-shrine is among the greatest art treasures of
Ireland, and his "well" is still visited, but he is best known
as patron of St. Mullins (Teach Moling) County Carlow. The
ancient monastery of Ferns included a number of cells, or
oratories, and the cathedral was built in the Irish style. At
present the remains of the abbey (refounded for Austin Canons,
in 1160, by Dermot MaeMurrough) include a round tower, about
seventy-five feet high in two stories, the lower of which is
quadrangular, and the upper polygonal. Close by is the Holy Well
of St. Mogue.
Ferns was raided by the Scandinavians in 834, 836, 839, 842,
917, 920, 928, and 930, and was burned in 937. St. Peter's
Church, Ferns, dates from about the year 1060, and is of the
Hiberno-Romanesque style, having been built by Bishop O'Lynam,
who died in 1062. The bishops were indifferently styled as of
Ferns, Hy Kinsellagh, or Wexford; thus, Maeleoin O'Donegan (d.
1125) is called "Bishop of Wexford", while Bishop O'Cathan (d.
1135) is named "Archbishop of Hy Kinsellagh". This was by reason
of the fact that the boundaries of the diocese are coextensive
with the territory of Hy Kinsellagh, on which account Ferns
includes County Wexford with small portions of Wicklow and
Carlow. Dermot MacMurrough, King of Leinster, burned the city of
Ferns in 1166, "for fear that the Connacht men would destroy his
castle and his house", and, three years later, he brought over a
pioneer force of Welshmen. He died in 1171, and, at his own
request, was buried "near the shrines of St. Maedhog and St.
Moling". The same year Henry II of England landed in Ireland,
where he remained for six months.
Ailbe O'Molloy, a Cistercian, who ruled from 1185 to 1222, was
the last Irish bishop in the pre-Reformation history of Ferns.
He attended the Fourth General Council of Lateran (1215) and, on
his return, formed a cathedral chapter. His successor, Bishop
St. John, was granted by Henry III (6 July, 1226) a weekly
market at Ferns and an annual fair, also a weekly market at
Enniscorthy. This bishop (8 April, 1227) assigned the manor of
Enniscorthy to Philip de Prendergast, who built a castle, still
in excellent preservation. In exchange, he acquired six
plough-lands forever for the See of Ferns. He held a synod at
Selskar (St. Sepulchre) Priory, Wexford (8 September, 1240). The
appointment of a dean was confirmed by Clement IV (23 August.
1265). Bishop St. John rebuilt the cathedral of Ferns, which
from recent discoveries seems to have been 180 feet in length,
with a crypt. A fine stone statue of St. Aedan, evidently early
Norman work, is still preserved. In 1346 the castle of Ferns was
made a royal appanage, and constables were appointed by the
Crown, but it was recovered by Art MacMurrough in 1386. Patrick
Barret, who ruled from 1400 to 1415, removed the episcopal chair
of Ferns to New Ross, and made St. Mary's his catherdal. His
successor, Robert Whitty, had an episcopate of forty years,
dying in February, 1458. Under John Purcell (1459-1479),
Franciscan friars acquired a foundation in Enniscorthy, which
was dedicated 18 October, 1460. Lawrence Neville (1479-1503)
attended a provincial council at Christ Church Cathedral,
Dublin, on 5 March, 1495. His successor, Edmund Comerford, died
in 1509, whereupon Nicholas Comyn was elected. Bishop Comyn
resided at Fethard Castle, and assisted at the provincial
councils of 1512 and 1518. He was transferred to Waterford and
Lismore in 1519, and was replaced by John Purcell, whose
troubled episcopate ended on 20 July, 1539. Though
schismatically eonsecrated, Alexander Devereux was rehabilitated
under Queen Mary as Bishop of Ferns, and died at Fethard Castle
on 6 July, 1566 -- the last pre-Reformation bishop. Peter Power
was appointed his successor in 1582, but the temporalities of
the see were held by John Devereux. Bishop Power died a
confessor, in exile, 15 December, 1588. Owing to the disturbed
state of the diocese and the lack of revenue no bishop was
provided till 19 April, 1624, but meantime Father Daniel
O'Drohan, who had to adopt the alias of "James Walshe", acted as
vicar Apostolic (1606-1624). John Roche was succeeded by another
John Roche, 6 February, 1644, who never entered on possession,
the see being administered by William Devereux from 1636 to
1644. Dr. Devereux was an able administrator at a trying period,
and he wrote an English catechism, which was used in the diocese
until a few years ago. Nicholas French was made Bishop of Ferns
15 September, 1644, and died in exile at Ghent, 23 August, 1679.
His episcopate was a remarkable one, and he himself was a most
distinguished prelate. Bishop Wadding (1678-1691) wrote some
charming Christmas carols, which are still sung in Wexford. His
successors, Michael Rossiter (1695-1709), John Verdon
(1709-1729), and the Franciscan Ambrose O'Callaghan (1729-1744),
experienced the full brunt of the penal laws. Nicholas Sweetman
(1745-1786) was twice imprisoned on suspicion of "disloyalty",
while James Caulfield (1786-1814) was destined to outlive the
"rebellion" of '98. One of the Ferns priests Father James Dixon,
who was transported as a "felon", was the first Prefect
Apostolic of Australia. All the post-Reformation bishops lived
mostly at Wexford until 1809, in which year Dr. Ryan, coadjutor
bishop, commenced the building of a cathedral in Enniscorthy,
which had been assigned him as a mensal parish. As Bishop
Caulfield was an invalid from the year 1809 the diocese was
administered by Dr. Ryan, who, with the permission of the Holy
See, transferred the episcopal residence to Enniscorthy. Bishop
Ryan died 9 March, 1819, and was buried in the cathedral. His
successor, James Keating (1819-1849), ruled for thirty years,
and commenced building the present cathedral, designed by Pugin.
Myles Murphy (1850-1856) and Thomas Furlong (1857-1875) did much
for the diocese, while Michael Warren (1875-1884) is still
lovingly remembered.
From an interesting Relatio forwarded to the Propaganda by
Bishop Caulfield in 1796, the Diocese of Ferns is described as
38 miles in length and 20 in breadth, with eight borough towns,
and a chapter of nineteen members. In pre-Reformation days it
had 143 parishes; 17 monasteries of Canons Regular of St.
Augustine; 3 priories of Knights Templars; 2 Cistercian abbeys;
3 Franciscan friaries; 2 Austin friaries; 1 Carmelite friary,
and 1 Benedictine priory. It never had a nunnery nor a Dominican
friary. (The Jesuits had a flourishing college in New Ross in
1675.) The population was 120,000, of which 114,000 were
Catholics, and there were 80 priests, including regulars. There
were 36 parishes, many of which had no curates.
At present (1909), the population is 108,750, of which 99,000
are Catholics. There are 41 parishes, two of which (Wexford and
Enniscorthy) are mensal. The parish priests are 39 and the
curates are 66, while the churches number 92. The religious
orders include Franciscans (one house), Augustinians (two
houses), and Benedietines (one house). The total clergy are 140.
In addition, there are 14 convents for religious women, and a
House of Missions (Superior Father John Rossiter), as also 6
Christian Brothers schools, diocesan college, a Benedictine
college, and several good schools for female pupils. Enniscorthy
cathedral was not completed until 1875, and the interior not
completely finished till 1908. Most Rev. Dr. James Browne was
consecrated Bishop of Ferns 14 September, 1884. He was born at
Mayglass, County Wexford in 1842, finished his studies at
Maynooth College, where he was ordained in 1865, and served for
nineteen years as curate and parish priest with conspicuous
ability.
COLGAN, Acta Sanct. Hib. (Louvain, 1648); BRENAN Eccl. Hist. of
Ireland (Dublin, 1840); ROTHE, Analecta, ed. MORAN (Dublin.
1884); WARE, Bishops of Ireland, ed. HARRIS (Dublin, 1739);
RENEHAN, Collections on Irish Church History, ed. MCCARTHY
(Dublin, 1874), II; GRATTAN-FLOOD, Hist. of Enniscorthy
(Enniscorthy, 1898); IDEM, The Episcopal City of Ferns in Irish
Eccl. Record, II, no. 358, IV, no. 368, VI, no. 380, BASSET,
Wexford (Dublin, 1885).
W.H. GRATTAN-FLOOD
Ferrara
Ferrara
Archdiocese of Ferrara (Ferrariensis).
Archdiocese immediately subject to the Holy See. The city, which
is the capital of the similarly named province, stands on the
banks of the Po di Volano, where it branches off to form the Po
di Primaro, in the heart of a rich agricultural district. The
origin of Ferrara is doubtful. No mention is made of it before
the eighth century. Until the tenth century it followed the
fortunes of Ravenna. In 986 it was given as a papal fief to
Tedaldo, Count of Canossa, the grandfather of Countess Matilda
against whom it rebelled in 1101. From 1115 it was directly
under the pope, though often claimed by the emperors. During
this period arose the commune of Ferrara. Gradually the
Salinguerra family became all-powerful in the city. They were
expelled in 1208 for their fidelity to the emperor, whereupon
the citizens offered the governorship to Azzo VI d'Este, whose
successors kept it, as lieges of the pope, until 1598, with the
exception of the brief period from 1313 to 1317, when it was
leased to the King of Sicily for an annual tribute. Alfonso I
d'Este, hoping to cast off the overlordship of the pope, kept up
relations with Louis XII of France long after the League of
Cambrai (1508) had been dissolved. In 1510 Julius II attempted
in person to bring him back to a sense of duty, but was not
successful. In 1519 Leo X tried to capture the town by surprise,
but he too failed; in 1522, however, Alfonso of his own accord
made his peace with Adrian VI. In 1597 Alfonso II died without
issue and named his cousin Cesare as his heir. Clement VIII
refused to recognize him and sent to Ferrara his own nephew,
Cardinal Pietro Aldobrandini, who in 1598 brought the town
directly under papal rule. In 1796 it was occupied by the
French, and became the chief town of the Bas-Po. In 1815 it was
given back to the Holy See, which governed it by a legate with
the aid of an Austrian garrison. In 1831 it proclaimed a
provisional government, but the Austrian troops restored the
previous civil conditions, which lasted until 1859, when the
territory was annexed to the Kingdom of Italy.
The dukes of Ferrara, especially Alfonso I (1505-1534) and
Alfonso II (1559-1597), were generous patrons of literature and
the arts. At their court lived Tasso, Ariosto, Boiardo, V.
Strozzi, G. B. Guarini, the historian Guido Bentivoglio, and
others. It counted many artists of renown, whose works adorn
even yet the churches and palaces of the city, e. g. the ducal
palace, the Schifanoia, Diamanti, Rovella, Scrofa-Calcagnini,
and other palaces. The more famous among the painters were
Benvenuto Tisi (Garofalo), Ercole Grandi, Ippolito Scarsello,
the brothers Dossi, and Girolamo da Carpi. Alfonso Cittadella,
the sculptor, left immortal works in the duomo, or cathedral
(Christ and the Apostles), and in San Giovanni (Madonna).
Churches of note are the cathedral, SS. Benedetto and Francesco,
San Domenico (with its beautiful carved choir stalls of the
fourteenth century). The most famous work of ecclesiastical
architecture is the magnificent Certosa. The university was
founded in 1391 by Boniface IX. Ferrara was the birthplace of
Savonarola and of the great theologian, Silvestro di Ferrara,
both Dominicans.
The earliest bishop of certain date is Constantine, present at
Rome in 861; St. Maurelius (patron of the city) must have lived
before this time. Some think that the bishops of Ferrara are the
successors to those of Vigonza (the ancient Vicuhabentia). Other
bishops of note are Filippo Fontana (1243), to whom Innocent IV
entrusted the task of inducing the German princes to depose
Frederick II; Blessed Alberto Pandoni (1261) and Blessed
Giovanni di Tossignano (1431); the two Ippolito d'Este (1520 and
1550) and Luigi d'Este (1553), all three munificent patrons of
learning and the arts; Alfonso Rossetti (1563), Paolo Leoni
(1579), Giovanni Fontana (1590), and Lorenzo Magalotti (1628),
all four of whom eagerly supported the reforms of the Council of
Trent; finally, the saintly Cardinal Carlo Odescalchi (1823). Up
to 1717 the Archbishop of Ravenna claimed metropolitan rights
over Ferrara; in 1735 Clement XII raised the see to
archiepiscopal rank, without suffragans. It has 89 parishes and
numbers 130,752 souls; there are two educational institutions
for boys and six for girls, nine religious houses of men and
nineteen of women.
COUNCIL OF FERRARA
When Saloniki (Thessalonica) fell into the hands of the Turks
(1429) the Emperor John Palaeologus approached Martin V, Eugene
IV, and the Council of Basle to secure help against the Turks
and to convoke a council for the reunion of the two Churches, as
the only means of efficaciously resisting Islam. At first it was
proposed to hold the council in some seaport town of Italy; then
Constantinople was suggested. The members of the Council of
Basle held out for Basle or Avignon. Finally (18 September,
1437), Eugene IV decided that the council would be held at
Ferrara, that city being acceptable to the Greeks. The council
was opened 8 January, 1438, by Cardinal Nicolo Albergati, and
the pope attended on 27 January. The synodal officers were
divided into three classes: (1) the cardinals, archbishops, and
bishops; (2) the abbots and prelates; (3) doctors of theology
and canon law. Before the arrival of the Greeks, proclamation
was made that all further action by the Council of Basle as such
would be null and void. The Greeks, i. e. the emperor with a
train of archbishops, bishops, and learned men (700 in all),
landed at Venice 8 February and were cordially received and
welcomed in the pope's name by Ambrogio Traversari, the General
of the Camaldolese. On 4 March the emperor entered Ferrara. The
Greek bishops came a little later. Questions of precedence and
ceremonial caused no small difficulty. For preparatory
discussions on all controverted points a committee of ten from
either side was appointed. Among them were Marcus Eugenicus,
Archbishop of Ephesus; Bessarion, Archbishop of Nicaea;
Balsamon; Siropolos and others, for the Greeks; while Cardinals
Giuliano Cesarini and Nicolo Albergati, Giovanni Turrecremata,
and others represented the Latins. The Greek Emperor prevented a
discussion on the Procession of the Holy Spirit and on the use
of leavened bread. For months the only thing discussed or
written about was the ecclesiastic teaching on purgatory. The
uncertainty of the Greeks on this head was the cause of the
delay. The emperor's object was to bring about a general union
without any concessions on the part of the Greeks in matters of
doctrine. Everybody deplored the delay, and a few of the Greeks,
among them Marcus Eugenicus, attempted to depart secretly, but
they were obliged to return.
The sessions began 8 October, and from the opening of the third
session the question of the Procession of the Holy Spirit was
constantly before the council. Marcus Eugenicus blamed the
Latins for having added the "Filioque" to the Nicene Creed
despite the prohibition of the Council of Ephesus (431). The
chief speakers on behalf of the Latins were Andrew, Bishop of
Rhodes, and Cardinal Giuliano Cesarini, who pointed out that the
addition was dogmatically correct and not at all contrary to the
prohibition of the Council of Ephesus, nor to the teaching of
the Greek Fathers. Bessarion admitted the orthodoxy of the
"Filioque" teaching, but maintained it ought not to have been
added to the Creed. Twelve sessions were (III-XV) taken up with
this controversy. On both sides many saw no hope of an
agreement, and once more many Greeks were eager to return home.
Finally the emperor permitted his followers to proceed to the
discussion of the orthodoxy of the "Filioque". In the meantime
the people of Florence had invited the pope to accept for
himself and the council the hospitality of their city. They
hoped in this way to reap great financial profit. The offer was
accompanied by a large gift of money. Eugene IV, already at a
loss for funds and obliged to furnish hospitality and money to
the Greeks (who had come to Italy in the pope's own fleet),
gladly accepted the offer of the Florentines. The Greeks on
their part agreed to the change. The council thus quitted
Ferrara without having accomplished anything, principally
because the emperor and Marcus Eugenicus did not wish to reach
an agreement in matters of doctrine. (See Council of Florence.)
ARCHDIOCESE.--CAPPELLETTI, Le Chiese d'Italia (Venice, 1846),
IV, 9-11, 24-226; FRIZZI, Memorie per la Storia di Ferrara
(Ferrara, 1791); AGNELLI, Ferrara in Italia Artistica (Bergamo,
1902).
COUNCIL.--MANSI, Coll. Conc., XXIX; HARDOUIN, Coll. Conc., IX;
HEFELE, Konziliengeschichte (2nd ed.), VII; CECCONI, Studi
storici sul concilio di Firenze (Florence, 1869). U. BENIGNI.
Gaudenzio Ferrari
Gaudenzio Ferrari
An Italian painter and the greatest master of the Piedmontese
School, b. at Valduggia, near Novara. Italy, c. 1470: d. at
Milan, 31 January, 1546. His work is vast but poorly known. He
seems never to have left his beloved Piedmont or Lombardy save
perhaps on one occasion. He had seen Leonardo at work in Milan
(1490-98), and learned from him lessons in expression and in
modeling. But he owed more to his compatriots in the North: to
Bramante and Bramantino in architectural details, above all to
Mantegna, whose frescoes of the "Life of St. James" inspired
more than one paintings at Varallo.
Nothing is more uncertain than the history of this great man.
His earliest known works belong to the years 1508 and 1511; at
that time he was about forty years of age. He would seem to have
been formed in the good old Milanese school of such men as
Borgognone, Zenale, and Butinone, which kept aloof from the
brilliant fashion in art favoured by the court of the Sforzas,
and which prolonged the fifteenth century with its archaisms of
expression. Gaudenzio, this youngest and frankest of this group,
never fell under the influence of Leonardo, and hence it is that
on one point he always held out against the new spirit; he would
never daily with the paganism or rationalism of Renaissance art.
He was as passionately naturalistic as any painter of his time,
before all else, however, he was a Christian artist. He is the
only truly religious master of the Italian Renaissance, and this
trait it is which makes him stand out in any age where faith and
single-mindedness were gradually disappearing, as a man of
another country, almost of another time.
When we consider the works of Gaudenzio, more especially his
earlier ones, in the light of the fact that the district in
which he was born was in the direct line of communication
between North and South; and reflect that what might be termed
the "art traffic" between Germany and Italy was very great in
his time, we are forced to recognize that German influence
played a considerable part in the development of his genius, in
so far at least as his mind was amenable to external stimuli. He
is, in fact, the most German of the Italian painters. In the
heart of a school where art was becoming more and more
aristocratic, he remained the people's painter. In this respect
his personality stands out so boldly amongst the Itatian
painters of the time that it seems natural to infer that
Gaudenzio in his youth travelled to the banks of the Rhine, and
bathed long and deep in its mystic atmosphere.
Like the Gothic masters, he is perhaps the only
sixteenth-century painter who worked exclusively for churches or
convents. He is the only one in Italy who painted lengthy sacred
dramas and legends from the lives of the saints: a "Passion" at
Varallo; a "Life of the Virgin", and a "Life of St. Magdalen",
at Vercelli; and at times, after the fashion of the cinquecento,
he grouped many different episodes in one scene, at the expense
of unity in composition, till they resembled the mysteries, and
might be styled "sectional paintings". He was not aiming at art,
but at edification. Hence arose a certain negligence of form and
a carelessness of execution still more pronounced. The "Carrying
of the Cross" at Cannobio, the "Calvary" at Vercelli, the
"Deposition" at Turin, works of great power in many ways, and
unequalled at the time in Italy for pathos and feeling, are
somehow wanting in proportion, and give one the impression that
the conventional grouping has been departed from. The soul,
being filled as it were with its object, as overpowered by the
emotions; and the intellect confesses its inability to
synthesize the images which rise tumultuously from an over
excited sensibility. Another consequence of this peculiarity of
mental conformation is, perhaps, the abuse of the materials at
his disposal Gaudenzio never refrained from using doubtful
methods, such as ornaments in relief, the use of gilded stucco
worked into harness, armour, into the aureolas, etc. And to
heighten the effect he does not even hesitate to make certain
figures stand out in real, palpable relief; is fact some of his
frescoes are as much sculpture as they are painting, by reason
of this practice.
His history must always remain incomplete until we get further
enlightenment concerning that strange movement of the Pietist
preachers, which ended in establishing (1487-93) a great
Franciscan centre on the Sacro Monte de Varallo. It was in this
retreat that Gaudenzio spent the years which saw his genius come
to full maturity; it was there he left his greatest works, his
"Life of Christ" of 1513, in twenty-one frescoes at Santa Maria
delle Grazie, and other works on the Sacro Monte dating between
1523 and 1528. It was there that the combined use of painting
and sculpture produced a most curious result. Fresco is only
used as an ornament, a sort of background to a scene presenting
a tableau vivant of figures in terra-cotta. Some of the groups
embrace no less than thirty figures. Forty chapels bring out in
this way the principal scenes in the drama of the Incarnation,
Gaudenzio is responsible for the chapels of the Magi, the
Piet`a, and the Calvary.
In his subsequent works, at Vercelli (1530-34) and at Saronno
(in the cupola of Santa Maria dei Miracoli, 1535), the influence
of Correggio is furiously blended with the above-mentioned
German leanings. The freshness and vigour of his inspiration
remain untouched in all their homely yet stern grace. The
"Assumption" at Vercelli is perhaps the greatest lyric in
Italian art; this lyric quality in his painting is still more
intense in the wonderful "Glory of Angels", in the cupola at
Saronno, the most enthusiastic and jubilant symphony that any
art has ever produced. In all Correggio's art there is nothing
more charming than the exquisite sentiment and tender rusticity
of "The Flight into Egypt", in the cathedral of Como. The
artist's latest works were those he executed at Milan, whither
he retired in 1536. In these paintings, the creations of a man
already seventy years of age, the vehemence of feeling sometimes
becomes almost savage, the presentation of his ideas abrupt and
apocalyptic. His method becomes colossal and more and more
careless, but still in the "Passion" at Santa Maria delle Grazie
(1542) we cannot fail to trace the hand of a master.
Gaudenzio was married at least twice. By his first marriage a
son was born to him in 1509 and a daughter in 1512. He married,
in 1528, Maria Mattia della Foppa who died about 1540, shortly
after the death of his son. These sorrows doubtless affected the
character of his later works. Gaudenzio's immediate influence
was scarcely appreciable. His pupils Lanino and Della Cerva are
extremely mediocre. Nevertheless when the day of Venice's
triumph came with Tintoretto, and Bologna's with the Carraccis
in the counter-reform movement, it was the art of Gaudenzio
Ferrari that triumphed in them. The blend of Northern and Latin
genius in his work, so characteristic of the artists of the Po
valley, was carried into the ateliers of Bologna by Dionysius
Calvaert. It became the fashion, displacing, as it was bound to
do, the intellectual barrenness and artistic exoticism of the
Florentine School.
LOUIS GILLET
Lucius Ferraris
Lucius Ferraris
An eighteenth-century canonist of the Franciscan Order. The
exact dates of his birth and death are unknown, but he was born
at Solero, near Alessandria in Northern Italy. He was also
professor, provincial of his order, and consultor of the Holy
Office. It would seem he died before 1763. He is the author of
the "Prompta Bibliotheca canonica, juridica, moralis,
theologica, necnon ascetica, polemica, rubricistica, historica",
a veritable encyclopedia of religious knowledge. The first
edition of this work appeared at Bologna, in 1746. A second
edition, much enlarged, also a third, were published by the
author himself. The fourth edition, dating from 1763 seems to
have been published after his death. This, like those which
followed it, contains the additions which the author had made to
the second edition under the title of additiones auctoris, and
also other enlargements (additiones ex aliena manu) inserted in
their respective places in the body of the work (and no longer
in the appendix as in the former editions) and supplements. The
various editions thus differ from each of her. The most recent
are: that of the Benedictines (Naples, 1844-55), reproduced by
Migne (Paris, 1861-1863), and an edition published at Paris
1884. A new edition was published at Rome in 1899 at the press
of the Propaganda in eight volumes, with a volume of
supplements, edited by the Jesuit, Bucceroni, containing several
dissertations and the recent and important documents of the Holy
See. This supplement serves to keep up to date the work of
Ferraris, which will ever remain a precious mine of information,
although it is sometimes possible to reproach the author with
laxism.
A. VAN HOVE
Vicente Ferre
Vicente Ferre
Theologian, b. at Valencia, Spain; d. at Salamanca in 1682. He
entered the Dominican Order at Salamanca, where he pursued his
studies in the Dominican College of St. Stephen. After teaching
in several houses of study of his order in Spain, he was called
from Burgos to Rome, where for eighteen years he was regens
primarius of the Dominican College of St Thomas ad Minervam.
From Rome he went to Salamanca, where he became prior of the
convent and, after three years, regent of studies. In his own
time he was recognized as one of the best Thomists of the
seventeenth century, and posterity acknowledges that ha
published works possess extraordinary fullness, clearness, and
order. He died while publishing his commentaries on the Summa
Theologica of St. Thomas. We have two folio volumes on the
Secunda Secundae, covering the treatises of faith, hope, and
charity, and the opposite vices. Published at Rome in 1669;
three on the Prima, published at Salamanca, in 1675, 1676, and
1678 respectively; and three on the Prima Seeundae, down to Q.
cxiii, published at Salamanca, 1679, 1681, and 1690. His
confrere Perez `a Lerma added to Q. cxiv the treatise on merit.
QUETIF AND ECHARD, Script. Ord. Praed., II, 696; ANTONIO,
Bibliotheca Hisp. Nova (Madrid, 1783), II, 261.
A.L. MCMAHON
Antonio Ferreira
Antonio Ferreira
A poet, important both for his lyric and his dramatic
compositions, b. at Lisbon, Portugal, in 1528; d. there of the
plague in 1569. He studied law at Coimbra, where, however, he
gave no less ateention to belles-letteres than to legal codes,
ardently reading the poetry of classic antiquity. Successful in
his chosen profession, he became a judge of the Supreme Court at
Lisbon, and enjoyed close relations with eminent personages of
the court of John III. Ferreira stands apart from the great
majority of the Portuguese poets of his time in that he never
used Spanish, but wrote constantly in his native language. Yet
he is to be classed with the reformers of literary taste, for,
like Sa de Miranda, he abandoned the old native forms to further
the movement of the Renaissance. He manifested a decided
interest in the Italian lyric measures, already given some
elaboration by Sa de Miranda, and displayed some skill in the
use of the hendecasyllable. The sonnet, the elegy, the idyll,
the verse epistle, the ode, and kindred forms he cuitlvated with
a certain felicity, revealing not only his study of the Italian
Renaissance poets, but also a good acquaintance with the Greek
and Latin masters.
It is by his dramatic endeavours that he attained to greatest
prominence, for his tragedy "Ines de Castro", in particular is
regarded as one of the chief monuments of Portughese literature.
He began his work on the drama while still a student at Coimbra,
writing there for his own amusement his first comedy, "Bristo",
dealing with the old classic theme of lost children and later
agnitions, which was often utilized for the stage of the
Renaissance and has been made familiar by Shakespeare. Much
improvement in dramatic technique is evinced by his second
comedy, "O. Cioso", which treats realistically the figure of a
jealous husband. It is considered as the earliest
character-comedy in modern Europe. Written in prose, it exhibits
a clever use of dialogue and has really comical scenes. None of
the compositions of Ferreira appeared in print during his
lifetime and the first edition of his two comedies is that of
1622. On English translation of the "Cioso" made by Musgrave was
published in 1825. His tragedy, "Ines de Casro", imitates in its
form the models of ancient Greek literature, and shows ltalian
influence in its use of blank verse, but it owes its
suject-matter to native Portuguese history, concerning itself
with the love of King Pedro for the beautiful for the Ines de
Castro, an incident which has also been spendidly treated by
Camoes in his "Lusiades", and has furnished the theme for at
least ten Portughese and four Spanish plays, and over a score of
compositions in foreign languages. If tested by the requirements
of the theatre, the play is doubtless far frorn perfect, but the
purity of its style and diction ensures its popularity with its
author's compatriots. It was rendered into English by Musgrave
in 1826. The rather free Spanish version of 1577 was made on the
basis of a manuscript copy of the Portughese original, for the
first Portughese printed edition is of 1587.
J.D.M. FORD
Rafael Ferrer
Rafael Ferrer
A Spanish missionary and explorer; b. at Valencia, in 1570; d.
at San Jose, Peru, in 1611. His father had destined him for a
military career, but he entered the Society of Jesus, and in
1593 was sent to Quito, Ecuador. In 1601 he penetrated the
territory of the Cofanis, a hostle tribe who had been a source
of great trouble to the Spanish Government. Within three years
the Indians of several villages were so civilized by the
influence of religion that the surrounding country was open to
colonists.
In 1605, at the command of the viceroy of Quito, Ferrer went
among the. uncivilized tribes of the River Napo. He was well
received by the Indians, and on this journey which lasted two
and a half years, he travelled 3600 miles into the interior,
bringing back with him a chart of the basin of the Napo, a map
of the country he had explored, and an herbarium which he
presented to the viceroy. He was appointed governor and chief
magistrate of the Cofanis, and received the title of "Chief of
the Missions of the Cofanis". After a period of rest at the
mission he next journeyed northward from Quito through
unexplored forests, and discovered a large lake and the River
Pilcomago. In 1610 he returned to his labours among the Indians,
bending his energies to the civilization ot the few tribes of
the Cofanis who were not yet within the range of his influence.
He met his death at the hands of the chief of one of these
tribes, whom he had compelled to abandon polygamy. The murderer
was slain in turn by his tribesmen, who were enraged on learning
of his deed. An extract from Father Ferrer's account of his
explorations was published by Fr. Detre in the "Lettres
Edifiantes", and the same extract was also published by Father
Bernard de Bologne in the "Bibliotheca Societatis Jesu", but the
original manuscript was lost and has never been published in its
entirety. Besides compiling his "Arte de la Lengua Cofana",
Father Ferrer translated the catechism and selections from the
Gospels for every Sunday in the year into the language of the
Cofanis.
BLANCHE M. KELLY
Abbey of Ferrieres
Abbey of Ferrieres
Situated in the Diocese of Orleans, department of Loiret, and
arrondissement of Montargis. The Benedictine Abbey of
Ferrieres-en-Gatinais has been most unfortunate from the view of
historical science, having lost its archives, its charters, and
everything which would aid in the reconstruction of its history.
Thus legend and the existence of the abbey about the credulity
have had full play. But it is interesting to encounter in the
work of an obscure Benedictine of the eighteenth century, Dom
Philippe Mazoyer, information perhaps the most accurate and
circumspect obtainable. According to Dom Mazoyer there was
formerly at Ferrieres a chapel dedicated to the Blessed Virgin
under the title Notre-Dame de Bethleem de Ferrieres. With regard
to the foundation of the abbey, he thinks it cannot be traced
beyond the reign of Dagobert (628-38) and he rightly regards as
false the Acts of St. Savinian and the charter of Clovis, dated
508, despite the favourable opinion of Dom Morin. Some have
based conjectures on the antiquity of portions of the church of
Saint-Pierre et Saint-Paul de Ferrieres, which they profess to
trace back the sixth century, but this is completely disproved
by archeological testimony. On the other hand the existence of
the abbey about the year 630 seems certain, and rare documents,
such as the diploma of Charles the Bald preserved in the
archives of Orleans, bear witness to its prosperity. This
prosperity reached its height in the time of the celebrated Loup
(Lupus) of Ferrieres (c. 850), when the abbey became a rather
active literary centre. The library must have benefited thereby,
but it shared the fate of the monastery, and is represented
to-day by rare fragments. One of these, preserved at the Vatican
library (Reg.1573) recalls the memory of St. Aldric (d. 836),
Abbot of Ferrieres before he become Archbishop of Sens. There is
here also loosely arranged catalogue of some of the abbots of
Ferrieres between 887 and 987, which, imperfect though it is,
serves to rectify and complete that of the "Gallia Christiana".
Among the last names in the list of the abbots of Ferrieres is
that of Louis de Blanchefort, who in the fifteenth century
almost entirely restored the abbey. Grievously tried during the
war of religion, Ferrieres disappeared with all the ancient
abbeys at the time of the French Revolution. Its treasures and
library were wasted and scattered. Today there are only to be
seen some ruins of the ancient monastic buildings. At the time
of the Concordat of 1802 and the ecclesiastical reorganization
of France, Ferrieres passed from the Archdiocese of Sens to the
Diocese of Orleans.
H. LECLERCQ
Heinrich, Freiherr von Ferstel
Heinrich, Freiherr von Ferstel
Architect; with Hansen and Schmidt, the creator of modern
Vienna; b. 7 July, 1828, at Vienna; d. at Grinzing, near Vienna,
14 July, 1883. His father was a bank-clerk. After wavering for
some time between the different arts, all of which possessed a
strong attraction for him, the talented youth finally decided on
architecture which he studied at the Academy under Van der Null,
Siccardsburg, and Roesner. After several years during which he
was in disrepute because of his part in the Revolution, he
entered the atelier of his uncle, Stache, where he worked at the
votive altar for the chapel of St. Barbara in the cathedral of
St. Stephen and co-operated in the restoration and construction
of many castles, chiefly in Bohennia. Journeys of some length
into Germany, Belgium, Holland, and England confirmed him in his
tendency towards Romanticism. It was in Italy, however, where he
was sent as a bursar in 1854, that he was converted to the
Renaissance style of architecture. This was thenceforth his
ideal, not because of its titanic grandeur, but because of its
beauty and symmetrical harmony of proportion, realized
pre-eminently in Bramante, his favourite master. He turned from
the simplicity and restraint of the Late Renaissance to the use
of polychromy by means of graffito decoration and terra-cotta.
This device, adapted from the Early Renaissance and intended to
convey a fuller sense of life, he employed later with marked
success in the Austrian Museum.
While still in Italy he was awarded the prize in the competition
for the votive church (Votivkirche) of Vienna (1855) over
seventy-four contestants, for the most part celebrated
architects. In the masterpiece of modern ecclesiastical
architecture he produced a structure of marvellous symmetry
designed along strong architectural principles, with a simple,
well-defined ground plan, a harmonious correlation of details,
and a sumptuous scheme of decoration (1856-79). After his death
this edifice was proposed by Sykes as a model for the new
Westminster cathedral in London. Another of Ferstel's monumental
works belonging to the same period is the Austro-Hungarian bank
in Vienna, in the style of the Early Italian Renaissance
(1856-60). The expansion of the city of Vienna enabled Ferstel,
with Eitelberger, to develop civic architecture along artistic
lines (burgomaster's residence, stock exchange 1859). At the
same time he had also the opportunity of putting his ideas into
practice in a number of private dwellings and villas at Brunn
and Vienna.
The more important buildings designed during his later years,
passing over the churches at Schonau near Teplitz, really
products of his earlier activity are the palace of Archduke
Ludwig Victor, his winter palace at Klessheim, the palace of
Prince Johahn Liechtenstein in the Rossau near Vienna, the
palace of the Austro-Hungarian Lloyd's, at Triest, but above all
the Austrian Museum (completed in 1871), a masterpiece of
interior economy of space with its impsosing arcaded court. Next
to his civic and ecclesiastical masterpieces comes the Vienna
University, of masterly construction with wonderfully effective
stairways (1871-84). Through a technical error his design for
the Berlin Reichstag building received no award.
Ferstel is the most distinctively Viennese of all Viennese
architects; able to give a structure beauty of design and
harmony without prejudice to the purpose it was to subserve, and
this because of his artistic versatility and inexhaustible
imagination. These qualities also assured him success as a
teacher, and were evident in his memoirs and numerous treatises,
which are masterpieces of clearness. Special mention should be
made those which appeared in Forster's architectural magazine.
In 1866 Ferstel was appointed professor at the Polytechnic
School, in 1871 chief goverment inspector of public works and in
1879 was raised to the rank of Freiherr. At the time of his
death he was still in the full vigour of his strength.
JOSEPH SAUER
Joseph Fesch
Joseph Fesch
Cardinal, b. at Ajaccio, Corsica, 3 January, 1763; d. at Rome,
13 May, 1839. He was the son of a captain of a Swiss regiment in
the service of Genoa, studied at the seminary of Aix, was made
archdeacon and provost of the chapter of Ajaccio before 1789,
but was obliged to leave Corsica when his family sided with
France against the English, who came to the island in answer to
Paoli's summons. The young priest was half-brother to Letizia
Ramolino, the mother of Napoleon and upon arriving in France he
entered the commissariat department of the army; later, in 1795,
became commissary of war under Bonaparte, then in command of the
Armee d'Italie. When religious peace was reestablished, Fesch
made a month's retreat under the direction of Emery, the
superior of Saint-Sulpice and re-entered ecclesiastical life.
During the Consulate he became canon of Bastia and helped to
negotiate the Concordat of 1801; on 15 August, 1802, Caprara
consecrated him Archbishop of Lyons, and in 1803 Pius VII
created him cardinal.
On 4 April, 1803, Napoleon appointed Cardinal Fesch successor to
Cacault as ambassador to Rome, giving him Chateaubriand for
secretary. The early part of his sojourn in the Eternal City was
noted for his differences with Chateaubriand and his efforts to
have the Concordat extended to the Italian Republic. He
prevailed upon Pius VII to go to Paris in person and crown
Napoleon. This was Fesch's greatest achievement. He accompanied
the pope to France and as grand almoner, blessed the marriage of
Napoleon and Josephine before the coronation ceremony took
place. By a decree issued in 1805, the missionary institutions
of Saint-Lazare and Saint-Sulpice were placed under the
direction of Cardinal Fesch, who, laden with this new
responsibility, returned to Rome. In 1806, after the occupation
of Ancona by French troops, and Napoleon's letter proclaiming
himself Emperor of Rome, Alquier was named to succeed Fesch as
ambassador to Rome. Returning to his archiepiscopal See of
Lyons, the cardinal remained in close touch with his nephew's
religious policy and strove, occasionally with success, to
obviate certain irreparable mistakes. He accepted the
coadjutorship to Dalberg, prince-primate, in the See of
Ratisbon, but, in 1808, refused the emperor's offer of the
Archbishopric of Paris, for which he could not have obtained
canonical institution. Although powerless to prevent either the
rupture between Napoleon and the pope in 1809 or the closing of
the seminaries of Saint-Lazarre, Saint-Esprit, and the Missions
Etrangeres, Fresch nevertheless managed to deter Napoleon from
signing a decree relative to the Gallican Church. He consented
to bless Napoleon's marriage with Marie-Louise, but, according
the researches of Geoffrey de Grandmaison, he was not
responsible to the same extent as the members of the diocesan
officialite for the illegal annulment of the emperor's first
marriage.
In 1809 and 1810 Fresch presided over the two ecclesiastical
commissions charged with the question of canonical institution
of bishops, but the proceedings were so conducted that neither
commission adopted any schismatic resolutions. As its president,
he opened the National Council od 1811, but at the very outset
he took and also administered the oath (forma juramenti
professionis fidei) required by the Bull "Injunctum nobis" of
Pius IV; it was decided by eight votes out of eleven that the
method of canonical institution could not altered independently
of the pope. A message containing the assurance of the
cardinal's loyalty, and addressed to the supreme pontiff, then
in exile at Fontainebleau, caused the Fesch to incur the
emperor's disfavour and to forfeit the subsidy of 150,000
florins which he had received as Dalberg's coadjutor. Under the
Restoration and the Monarchy of July, Fesch lived at Rome, his
Archdiocese of Lyons being in charge of an administrator. He
died without again returning to France and left a splendid
collection of pictures, a part of which was bequeathed to his
epicopal city.
As a diplomat, Fesch sometimes employed questionable methods.
His relationship to the emperor and his cardinalitical dignity
often made his position a difficult one; at least he could never
be accused of approving the violent measures resorted to by
Napoleon. As Archbishop, he was largely instrumental in
re-establishing the Brothers of Christian Doctrine and recalling
the Jesuits, under the name of Pacanarists. The Archdiocese of
Lyons is indebted to him for some eminently useful institutions.
It must be admitted, moreover, that in his pastoral capacity
Fesch took a genuine interest in the education of priests.
GEORGES GOYAU
Josef Fessler
Josef Fessler
Bishop of St. Polten in Austria and secretary of the Vatican
Council; b. 2 December, 1813, at Lochau near Bregenz in the
Vorarlberg; d. 25 April, 1872. His parents were peasants. He
early showed great abilities. His classical studies were done at
Feldkirch his philosophy at Innsbruck including a year of legal
studies, and has theology at Brixen. He was ordained priest in
1837, and, after a year as master in a school at Innsbruck,
studied for two more years in Vienna life then became professor
of ecclesiastical history and canon law in the theological
school at Brixen, 1841-52. He published at the quest of the
Episcopal Conferenee of Wurzburg, in 1848, a useful little book
"Ueber die Provincial-Concilien und Dioecesan-Synoden"
(Innsbruck, 1849), and in 1850-1 the well-known "Institutiones
Patrologiae quas ad frequentiorem utiliorem et faciliorem SS.
Patrum lectionem promovendam concinnavit J. Fessler" (Innsbruck,
2 Vols. 8vo). This excellent work superseded the unfinished
books of Moehler and Permaneder and was not surpassed by the
subsequent works of Alzog and Nirschl. In its new edition by the
late Prof. Jungmann of Louvain (Innsbruck, 1890-6), it is still
of great value to the student, in spite of the newer information
given by Bardenhewer. From 1856 to 1861 Fessler was professor of
canon law in the University Of Vienna, after making special
studies for six months at Rome. He was consecrated as assistant
bishop to the bishop of Brixen, Dr. Gasser, on 31 March, 1862,
and became his vicar-general for the Vorarlberg. On 23 Sept.,
1864, he was named by the emperor Bishop of St. Polten, not far
from Vienna. When at Rome in 1867 he was named assistant at the
papal throne. In 1869 Pope Pius IX proposed Bishop Fessler to
the Congregation for the direction of the coming Vatican Council
as secretary to the council. The appointment was well received,
the only objection being from Cardinal Caterini who thought the
choice of an Austrian might make the other nations jealous.
Bishop Fessler was informed of his appointment on 27 March, and
as the pope wished him to come with all speed to Rome, he
arrived there on 8 July, after hastily dispatching the business
of his diocese. He had a pro-secretary and two assistants. It
was certainly wise to choose a prelate whose vast and intimate
acquaintance with the Fathers and with ecclesiastical history
was equalled only by his thorough knowledge of canon law. He
seems to have given universal satisfaction by his work as
secretary, but the burden was a heavy one, and in spite of his
excellent constitution his untiring labours were thought to have
been the cause of his early death. Before the council he
published an opportune work "Das letzte und das naechste
allgemeine Konsil" (Freiburg, 1869) and after the council he
replied in a masterly brochure to the attack on the council by
Dr. Schulte, professor of canon law and German law at Prague.
Dr. Schulte's pamphlet on the power of the Roman popes over
princes, countries, peoples, and individuals, in the light of
their acts since the reign of Gregory VII, was very similar in
character to the Vaticanism pamphlet of Mr. Gladstone, and
rested on just the same fundamental misunderstanding of the
dogma of Papal Infallibility as defined by the Vatican Council.
The Prussian Government promptly appointed Dr. Schute to a
professorship at Bonn, while it imprisoned Catholic priests and
bishops. Fessler's reply, "Die wahre und die falsche
Unfehlbarkeit der Paepste" (Vienna, 1871), was translated into
French by Cosquin editor of "Le Franc,ais", and into English by
Father Ambrose St. John, of the Birmingham Oratory (The True and
False Infallibility of the Popes, London, 1875). It is still an
exceedingly valuable explanation of the true doctrine of
Infallibility as taught by the great Italian "Ultramontane"
theologians, such as Bellarmine in the sixteenth century, P.
Ballerini in the eighteenth, and Perrone in the nineteenth. But
it was difficult for those who had been fighting against the
definition to realize that the Infallibilists "had wanted no
more than this. Bishop Hefele of Rottenburg, who had strongly
opposed the definition and afterwards loyally accepted it, said
he entirely agree with the moderate view taken by bishop
Fessler, but doubted whether such views would be accepted as
sound in Rome. It was clear, one would have thought, that the
secretary of the council was likely to know; and the hesitations
of the pious and learned Hefele were removed by the warm Brief
of approbation which Pius IX addressed to the author.
ANTON ERDINGER, Dr. Joseph Fessler, Bischof v. St. Polten, ein
Lebensbild (Brixen, 1874); MITTERRUTZNER in Kirchenlexikon;
GRANDERATH AND KIRCH, Geschichte des Vatiannischen Konzils
(Freiburg im Br., 2 vols., 1903).
JOHN CHAPMAN
Domenico Feti
Domenico Feti
Feti, Domenico, an Italian painter; born at Rome, 1589; died at
Venice, 1624. He was a pupil of Cigoli (Ludovico Cardi,
1559-1613), or at least was much influenced by this master
during his sojourn in Rome. >From the end of the sixteenth
century Rome again became what she had ceased to be after the
sack of 1527, the metropolis of the beautiful. The jubilee of
the year 1600 marked the triumph of the papacy. Art, seeking its
pole now at Parma, now at Venice, now at Bologna, turning
towards Rome, concentrated itself there. Crowds of artists
flocked thither. This was the period in which were produced the
masterpieces of the Carracci, Caravaggio, Domenichino, Guido,
not counting those of many cosmopolitan artists, such as the
brothers Bril, Elsheimer, etc., and between 1600 and 1610
Rubens, the great master of the century, paid three visits to
Rome. This exceptional period was that of Domenico's
apprenticeship; the labour, the unique fermentation in the world
of art, resulted, as is well known, in the creation of an art
which in its essential characteristics became for more than a
century that of all Europe. For the old local and provincial
schools (Florentine, Umbrian, etc.) Rome had the privilege of
substituting a new one which was characterized by its
universality . Out of a mixture of so many idioms and dialects
she evolved an international language, the style which is called
baroque. The discredit thrown on this school should not lead us
to ignore its grandeur. In reality, the reorganization of modern
painting dates from it.
Domenico is one of the most interesting types of this great
evolution. Eclecticism, the fusion of divers characteristics of
Correggio, Barrochi, Veronese, was already apparent in the work
of Cigoli. To these Feti added much of the naturalism of
Caravaggio. From him he borrowed his vulgar types, his powerful
mobs, his Bohemians, his beggars in heroic rags. From him also
he borrowed his violent illuminations, his novel and sometimes
fantastic portrayal of the picturesque, his rare lights and
strong shadows, his famous chiaroscuro, which, nevertheless, he
endeavoured to develop into full daylight and the diffuse
atmosphere of out-of-doors. He did not have time to succeed
completely in this. His colouring is often dim, crude, and
faded, though at times it assumes a golden patina and seems to
solve the problem of conveying mysterious atmospheric effects.
At an early age Domenico went to Mantua with Cardinal Gonzaga,
later Duke of Mantua, to whom he became court painter (hence his
surname of Mantovano), and he felt the transient influence of
Giulio Romano. His frescoes in the cathedral, however, are the
least characteristic and the feeblest of his works. Domenico was
not a good frescoist. Like all modern painters he made use of
oils too frequently. By degrees he abandoned his decorative
ambitions. He painted few altar-pieces, preference leading him
to execute easel pictures, For the most part these dealt with
religious subjects, but conceived in an intimate manner for
private devotion. Scarcely any of his themes were historical,
and few taken from among those, such as the Nativity, Calvary,
or the entombment, which had been presented so often by
painters. He preferred subjects more human and less dogmatic,
more in touch with daily life, romance, and poetry. He drew by
preference from the parables, as in "The Labourers in the
Vineyard", "The Lost Coin" (Pitti Palace, Florence), "The Good
Samaritan", "The Return of the Prodigal Son" (and others at the
Museum of Dresden). Again he chose picturesque scenes from the
Bible, such as "Elias in the 'Wilderness" (Berlin) and the
history of Tobias (Dresden and St. Petersburg).
It is astonishing to find in the canvases of this Italian nearly
the whole repertoire of Rembrandt's subjects. They had a common
liking for the tenderest parts of the Gospel, for the scenes of
every day, of the "eternal present", themes for genre pictures.
But this is not all. Domenico was not above reproach. It was his
excesses which shortened his life. May we not assume that his
art is but a history of the sinful soul, a poem of repentance
such as Rembrandt was to present? There is found in both
painters the same confidence, the same sense of the divine
Protection in spite of sin (cf. Feti's beautiful picture, "The
Angel Guardian" at the Louvre), and also, occasionally, the same
anguish, the same disgust of the world and the flesh as in that
rare masterpiece, "Melancholy", in the same museum. Thus
Domenico was in the way of becoming one of the first masters of
lyric painting, and he was utilizing to the perfection of his
art all that he could learn at Venice when he died in that city,
worn out with pleasure, at the age of thirty-four. There is no
good life of this curious artist. His principal works are to be
found at Dresden (11 pictures), St. Petersburg, Vienna,
Florence, and Paris.
BAGLIONE, Le vite de' pittore (Rome, 1642), 155; LANZI, Storia
pittorica dell' Italiana (Milan, 1809); tr. ROSCOE (London,
1847), I, 471; II, 339; CHARLES BLANC, Histoire des peintres:
Ecole romaine (Paris, s. d.); BURCKHARDT, Cicerone, ed. BODE,
Fr. tr. (Paris, 1897), 809, 816; WOERMANN, Malerei (Leipzig,
1888), III, 233.
LOUIS GILLET
Fetishism
Fetishism
Fetishism means the religion of the fetish. The word fetish is
derived through the Portuguese feitic,o from the Latin factitius
(facere, to do, or to make), signifying made by art, artificial
(cf. Old English fetys in Chaucer). From facio are derived many
words signifying idol, idolatry, or witchcraft. Later Latin has
facturari, to bewitch, and factura, witchcraft. Hence Portuguese
feitic,o, Italian fatatura, O. Fr. faiture, meaning witchcraft,
magic. The word was probably first applied to idols and amulets
made by hand and supposed to possess magic power. In the early
part of the sixteenth century, the Portuguese, exploring the
West Coast of Africa, found the natives using small material
objects in their religious worship. These they called feitic,o,
but the use of the term has never extended beyond the natives on
the coast. Other names are bohsum, the tutelary fetishes of the
Gold Coast; suhman, a term for a private fetish; gree-gree on
the Liberian coast; monda in the Gabun country; bian among the
cannibal Fang; in the Niger Delta ju-ju -- possibly from the
French joujou. i. e. a doll or toy (Kingsley) -- and grou-grou,
according to some of the same origin, according to others a
native term, but the natives say that it is "a white man's
word". Every Congo leader has his m'kissi; and in other tribes a
word equivalent to "medicine" is used.
C. de Brosses first employed fetishism as a general descriptive
term, and claimed for it a share in the early development of
religious ideas (Du Culte des Dieux Fetiches, 1760). He compared
the phenomena observed in the negro worship of West Africa with
certain features of the old Egyptian religion. This comparison
led Pietschmann to emphasize the elements of fetishism in the
Egyptian religion by starting with its magic character. Basthold
(1805) claimed as fetish "everything produced by nature or art,
which receives divine honor, including sun, moon, earth, air,
fire, water, mountains, rivers, trees, stones, images, animals,
if considered as objects of divine worship". Thus the name
became more general, until Comte employed it to designate only
the lowest stage of religious development. In this sense the
term is used from time to time, e.g. de la Rialle, Schultze,
Menzies, Hoeffding. Taking the theory of evolution as a basis,
Comte affirmed that the fundamental law of history was that of
historic filiation, that is, the Law of the Three States. Thus
the human race, like the human individual, passed through three
successive stages: the theological or imaginative, illustrated
by fetishism, polytheism, monotheism; the metaphysical or
abstract, which differed from the former in explaining phenomena
not by divine beings but by abstract powers or essences behind
them; the positive or scientific, where man enlightened
perceives that the only realities are not supernatural beings,
e.g. God or angels, nor abstractions, e.g. substances or causes,
but phenomena and their laws as discovered by science. Under
fetishism, therefore, he classed worship of heavenly bodies,
nature-worship, etc. This theory is a pure assumption, yet a
long time passed before it was cast aside. The ease with which
it explained everything recommended it to many. Spencer formally
repudiated it (Principles of Sociology), and with Tylor made
fetishism a subdivision of animism.
While we may with Tylor consider the theory of Comte as
abandoned, it is difficult to admit his own view. For the spirit
supposed to dwell in the fetish is not the soul or vital power
belonging to that object, but a spirit foreign to the object,
yet in some way connected with and embodied in it. Lippert
(1881), true to his exaggerated animism, defines fetishism as "a
belief in the souls of the departed coming to dwell in anything
that is tangible in heaven or on earth". Schultze, analysing the
consciousness of savages, says that fetishism is a worship of
material objects. He claims that the narrow circle of savages'
ideas leads them to admire and exaggerate the value of very
small and insignificant objects, to look upon these objects
anthropopathically as alive, sentient, and willing, to connect
them with auspicious or inauspicious events and experiences, and
finally to believe that such objects require religious
veneration. In his view these four facts account for the worship
of stocks and stones, bundles and bows, gores and stripes, which
we call fetishism. But Schultze considers fetishism as a
portion, not as the whole, of primitive religion. By the side of
it he puts a worship of spirits, and these two forms run
parallel for some distance, but afterwards meet and give rise to
other forms of religion. He holds that man ceases to be a
fetish-worshipper as soon as he learns to distinguish the spirit
from the material object. To Mueller and Brinton the fetish is
something more than the mere object (Rel. of Prim. Peop.,
Philadelphia, 1898). Menzies (History of Religion, p. 129) holds
that primitive man, like the untutored savage of to-day, in
worshipping a tree, a snake, or an idol, worshipped the very
objects themselves. He regards the suggestion that these objects
represented or were even the dwelling-place of some spiritual
being, as an afterthought, up to which man has grown in the
lapse of ages. The study of the African negro refutes this view.
Ellis writes, "Every native with whom I have conversed on the
subject has laughed at the possibility of its being supposed
that he could worship or offer sacrifice to some such object as
a stone, which of itself would be perfectly obvious to his
senses was a stone only and nothing more".
De La Saussaye regards fetishism as a form of animism, i. e. a
belief in spirits incorporated in single objects, but says that
not every kind of worship paid to material objects can be called
fetishism, but only that which is connected with magic;
otherwise the whole worship of nature would be fetishism. The
stock and stone which forms the object of worship is then called
the fetish. Tylor has rightly declared that it is very hard to
say whether stones are to be regarded as altars, as symbols, or
as fetishes. He strives to place nature-worship as a connecting
link between fetishism and polytheism, though he is obliged to
admit that the single stages of the process defy any accurate
description. Others, e.g. Reville, de La Saussaye, separate the
worship of nature from animism. To Hoeffding, following Usener,
the fetish is only the provisional and momentary dwelling-place
of a spirit. Others, e.g. Lubbock, Happel, insist that the
fetish must be considered as a means of magic -- not being
itself the object of worship, but a means by which man is
brought into close contact with the deity -- and as endowed with
divine powers. De La Saussaye holds that to savages fetishes are
both objects of religious worship and means of magic. Thus a
fetish may often be used for magic purposes, yet it is more than
a mere means of magic, as being itself anthropopathic, and often
the object of religious worship.
Within the limits of animism, Tiele and Hoeffding distinguish
between fetishism and spiritism. Fetishism contents itself with
particular objects in which it is supposed a spirit has for a
longer or a shorter time taken up its abode. In spiritism,
spirits are not bound up with certain objects, but may change
their mode of revelation, partly at their own discretion, partly
under the influence of magic. Thus Hoeffding declares that
fetishism, as the lowest form of religion, is distinguished from
spiritism by the special weight it attributes to certain
definite objects as media of psychical activity. In selecting
objects of fetishism, religion appears, according to Hoeffding,
under the guise of desire. He holds that religious ideas are
only religious in virtue of this connexion between need and
expectation, i. e., as elements of desire, and that it is only
when thus viewed that fetishism can be understood.
Huebbe-Schleiden, on the contrary, holds that fetishism is not a
proper designation for a religion, because Judaism and
Christianity have their fetishes as well as the nature
religions, and says the word fetish should be used as analogous
to a word-symbol or emblem. Haddon considers fetishism as a
stage of religious development. Jevons holds magic and fetishism
to be the negation of religion. He denies that fetishism is the
primitive religion, or a basis from which religion developed, or
a stage of religious development. To him, fetishism is not only
anti-social, and therefore anti-religious, he even holds that
the attitude of superiority manifested by the possessor towards
the fetish deprives it of religious value, or rather makes it
anti-religious.
The fetish differs from an idol or an amulet, though at times it
is difficult to distinguish between them. An amulet, however, is
the pledge of protection of a divine power. A fetish may be an
image, e. g. the New Zealand wakapakoko, or not, but the divine
power or spirit is supposed to be wholly incorporated in it.
Farnell says an image may be viewed as a symbol, or as infused
with divine power, or as the divinity itself. Idolatry in this
sense is a higher form of fetishism. Farnell does not
distinguish clearly between fetish and amulet, and calls relics,
crucifixes, the Bible itself, fetishes. In his view any sacred
object is a fetish. But objects may be held as sacred by
external association with sacred persons or places without
having any intrinsic sanctity. This loose use of the word has
led writers to consider the national flag (especially a tattered
battle-flag), the Scottish stone of Scone, the mascot, the
horseshoe, as fetishes, whereas these objects have no value in
themselves, but are prized merely for their associations -- real
in the ease of the battle-flag, fancied in the case of the
horseshoe.
The theory advanced by certain writers that fetishism represents
the earliest stage of religious thought, has a twofold basis:
+ (1) philosophical;
+ (2) sociological.
(1) Philosophical Basis: The Theory of Evolution
Assuming that primitive man was a semi-brute, or a semi-idiot,
some writers of the Evolutionist School under the influence of
Comte taught that man in the earliest stage was a
fetish-worshipper, instancing in proof the African tribes, who
in their view represent the original state of mankind. This
basis is a pure assumption. More recent investigation reveals
clearly the universal belief in a Great God, the Creator and
Father of mankind, held by the negroes of Africa; Comber (Gram.
and Dict, of the Congo language) and Wilson (West Guinea) prove
the richness of their languages in structure and vocabulary;
while Tylor, Spencer, and most advocates of the animistic theory
look upon fetishism as by no means primitive, but as a decadent
form of the belief in spirit and souls. Finally, there are no
well-authenticated cases of savage tribes whose religion
consists of fetish-worship only.
(2) Sociological Basis
Historians of civilization, impressed by the fact that many
customs of savages are also found in the highest stages of
civilized life, concluded that the development of the race could
best be understood by taking the savage level as a
starting-point. The life of savages is thus the basis of the
higher development. But this argument can be inverted. For if
the customs of savages may be found among civilized races,
evident traces of higher ideals are also found among savages.
Furthermore, the theory that a savage or a child represents
exclusively, or even prominently, the life of primitive man,
cannot be entertained. Writers on the philosophy of religion
have used the word fetishism in a vague sense, susceptible of
many shades of meaning. To obtain a correct knowledge of the
subject, we must go to authorities like Wilson, Norris, Ellis,
and Kingsley, who have spent years with the African negroes and
have made exhaustive investigations on the spot. By fetish or
ju-ju is meant the religion of the natives of West Africa.
Fetishism, viewed from the outside, appears strange and complex,
but is simple in its underlying idea, very logically thought
out, and very reasonable to the minds of its adherents. The
prevailing notion in West Guinea seems to be that God, the
Creator (Anyambe, Anzam), having made the world and filled it
with inhabitants, retired to some remote corner of the universe,
and allowed the affairs of the world to come under the control
of evil spirits. Hence the only religious worship performed is
directed to these spirits, the purpose being to court their
favour or ward off their displeasure. The Ashantis recognize the
existence of a Supreme Being, whom they adore in a vague manner
although, being invisible, He is not represented by an idol. At
the commencement of the world, God was in daily relations with
man. He came on earth, conversed with men, and all went well.
But one day He retired in anger from the world, leaving its
management to subaltern divinities. These are spirits which
dwell everywhere -- in waters, woods, rocks -- and it is
necessary to conciliate them, unless one wishes to encounter
their displeasure. Such a phenomenon then as fetish- or
spirit-worship, existing alone without an accompanying belief in
a Supreme Being who is above all fetishes and other objects of
worship, has yet to be discovered. Other nations, holding the
fundamental idea of one God who is Lord and Creator, say that
this God is too great to interest Himself in the affairs of the
world; hence after having created and organized the world, He
charged His subordinates with its government. Hence they neglect
the worship of God for the propitiation of spirits. These
spirits correspond in their functions to the gods of Greek and
Roman mythology, but are never confounded with the Supreme Being
by the natives. Fetishism therefore is a stage where God is
quietly disregarded, and the worship due to Him is quietly
transferred to a multitude of spiritual agencies under His
power, but uncontrolled by it. "All the air and the future is
peopled by the Bantu", says Dr. Norris, "with a large and
indefinite company of spiritual beings. They have personality
and will, and most of the human passions, e.g., anger, revenge,
generosity, gratitude. Though they are all probably malevolent,
yet they may be influenced and made favorable by worship."
In the face of this animistic view of nature and the peculiar
logic of the African mind, all the seemingly weird forms and
ceremonies of fetishism, e.g. the fetish or witch-doctor, become
but the natural consequences of the basal idea of the popular
religious belief. There are grades of spirits in the
spirit-world. Miss Kingsley holds that fourteen classes of
spirits are clearly discernible. Dr. Nassau thinks the spirits
commonly affecting human affairs can be classified into six
groups. These spirits are different in power and functions. The
class of spirits that are human souls, always remain human
souls; they do not become deified, nor do they sink in grade
permanently. The locality of spirits is not only vaguely in the
surrounding air, but in prominent natural objects, e.g. caves,
enormous rocks, hollow trees, dark forests. While all can move
from place to place, some belong peculiarly to certain
localities. Their habitations may be natural (e.g. large trees,
caverns, large rocks, capes, and promontories; and for the
spirits of the dead, the villages where they had dwelt during
the lifetime of the body, or graveyards) or acquired, e.g. for
longer or shorter periods under the power wielded by the
incantations of the nganga or native doctor. By his magic art
any spirit may be localized in any object whatever, however
small, and thus placed it is under the control of the "doctor"
and subservient, to the wishes of the possessor or wearer of the
object in which it is confined. This constitutes a fetish. The
fetish-worshipper makes a clear distinction between the
reverence with which he regards a certain material object and
the worship he renders to the spirit for the time being
inhabiting it. Where the spirit, for any reason, is supposed to
have gone out of that thing and definitively abandoned it, the
thing itself is no longer reverenced, but thrown away as
useless, or sold to the curio-hunting white man.
Everything the African negro knows by means of his senses, he
regards as a twofold entity-partly spirit, partly not spirit or,
as we say, matter. In man this twofold entity appears as a
corporeal body, and a spiritual or "astral" body in shape and
feature like the former. This latter form of "life" with its
"heart" can be stolen by magic power while one is asleep, and
the individual sleeps on, unconscious of his loss. If the
life-form is returned to him before he awakes, he will be
unaware that anything unusual has happened. If he awakes before
this portion of him has been returned, though he may live for a
while, he will sicken and eventually die. If the magician who
stole the "life" has eaten the "heart", the victim sickens at
once and dies. The connexion of a certain spirit with a certain
mass of matter is not regarded as permanent. The native will
point out a lightning-struck tree, and tell you its spirit has
been killed, i. e., the spirit is not actually dead, but has
fled and lives elsewhere. When the cooking pot is broken, its
spirit has been lost. If his weapon fails, it is because some
one has stolen the spirit, or made it sick by witchcraft. In
every action of life he shows how much he lives with a great,
powerful spirit-world around him. Before starting to hunt or
fight, he rubs medicine into his weapons to strengthen the
spirit within them, talking to them the while, telling them what
care he has taken of them and what he has given them before,
though it was hard to give, and begging them not to fail him
now. He may be seen bending over the river, talking with proper
incantations to its spirit, asking that, when it meets an enemy,
it will upset the canoe and destroy the occupant. The African
believes that each human soul has a certain span of life due or
natural to it. It should be born, grow up through childhood,
youth, and manhood to old age. If this does not happen, it is
because some malevolent influence has blighted it. Hence the
Africans' prayers to the spirits are always: "Leave us alone!"
"Go away!" "Come not into this town, plantation, house; we have
never injured you. Go away!" This malevolent influence which
cuts short the soul-life may act of itself in various ways, but
a coercive witchcraft may have been at work. Hence the vast
majority of deaths -- almost all deaths in which no trace of
blood is shown -- are held to have been produced by human
beings, acting through spirits in their command, and from this
idea springs the widespread belief in and witches and
witchcraft.
Thus every familiar object in the daily life of these people is
touched with some curious fancy, and every trivial action is
regulated by a reference to unseen spirits who are unceasingly
watching an opportunity to hurt or annoy mankind. Yet upon close
inspection the tenets of this religion are vague and
unformulated, for with every tribe and every district belief
varies, and rites and ceremonies diverge. The fetish-man,
fetizero, nganga, chitbone, is the authority on all religious
observances. He offers the expiatory sacrifice to the spirits to
keep off evil. He is credited with a controlling influence over
the elements, winds and waters obey the waving of his charm, i.
e. a bundle of feathers, or the whistle through the magic
antelope horn. He brings food for the departed, prophesies, and
calls down rain. One of his principal duties is to find out
evil-doers, that is, persons who by evil magic have caused
sickness or death. He is the exorcist of spirits, the maker of
charms (i. e. fetishes), the prescriber and regulator of
ceremonial rites. He can discover who "ate the heart" of the
chief who died yesterday; who caused the canoe to upset and gave
lives to the crocodiles and the dark waters of the Congo; or
even "who blighted the palm trees of the village and dried up
their sap, causing the supply of malafu to cease; or who drove
away the rain from a district, and withheld its field of nguba"
(ground-nuts). The fetish doctors can scarcely be said to form a
class. They have no organization, and are honoured only in their
own districts, unless they be called specially to minister in
another place. In their ceremonies they make the people dance,
sing, play, beat drums, and they spot their bodies with their
"medicines". Anyone may choose the profession for himself, and
large fees are demanded for services.
Among the natives on the lower Congo is found the ceremony of
n'kimba, i. e. the initiation of young men into the mysteries
and rites of their religion. Every village in this region has
its n'kimba enclosure, generally a walled-in tract of half an
acre in extent buried in a thick grove of trees. Inside the
enclosure are the huts of the nganga and his assistants, as well
as of those receiving instruction. The initiated alone are
permitted to enter the enclosure, where a new language is
learned in which they can talk on religious matters without
being understood by the people. In other parts of the Congo the
office falls on an individual in quite an accidental manner,
e.g. because fortune has in some way distinguished him from his
fellows. Every unusual action, display of skill, or superiority
is attributed to the intervention of some supernatural power.
Thus the future nganga usually begins his career by some lucky
adventure, e. g. prowess in hunting, success in fishing, bravery
in war. He is then regarded as possessing some charm, or as
enjoying the protection of some spirit. In consideration of
payment he pretends to impart his power to others by means of
charms, i. e. fetishes consisting of different herbs, stones,
pieces of wood, antelope horns, skin and feathers tied in little
bundles, the possession of which is supposed to yield to the
purchaser the same power over spirits as the nganga himself
enjoys.
The fetish-man always carries in his sack a strange assortment
of articles out of which he makes the fetishes. The flight of
the poisonous arrow, the rush of the maddened buffalo, or the
venomous bite of the adder, can be averted by these charms; with
their assistance the waters of the Congo may be safely crossed.
The Moloki, ever ready to pounce on men, is checked by the power
of the nganga. The eye-teeth of leopards are an exceedingly
valuable fetish on the Kroo coast. The Kabinda negroes wear on
their necks a little brown shell sealed with wax to preserve
intact the fetish-medicine within. A fetish is anything that
attracts attention by its curious shape (e.g. an anchor) or by
its behaviour, or anything seen in a dream, and is generally not
shaped to represent the spirit. A fetish may be such by the
force of its own proper spirit, but more commonly a spirit is
supposed to be attracted to the object from without (e.g. the
suhman), whether by the incantations of the nganga or not. These
wandering spirits may be natural spirits or ghosts. The
Melanesians believe that the souls of the dead act through
bones, while the independent spirits choose stones as their
mediums (Brinton, Religions of Prim. Peoples, New York, 1897).
Ellis says, if a man wants a suhman (a fetish), he takes some
object (a rudely cut wooden image, a stone, a root of a plant,
or some red earth placed in a pan), and then calls on a spirit
of Sasabonsum (a genus of deities) to enter the object prepared,
promising it offerings and worship. If a spirit consents to take
up its residence in the object, a low hissing sound is heard,
and the suhman is complete.
Every house in the Congo village has its m'kissi; they are
frequently put over the door or brought inside, and are supposed
to protect the house from fire and robbery. The selection of the
object in which the spirit is to reside is made by the native
nganga. The ability to conjure a free wandering spirit into the
narrow limits of this material object, and to compel or
subordinate its power to the service of some designated person
and for a special purpose, rests with him. The favourite
articles used to confine spirits are skins (especially tails of
bushcats), horns of the antelope, nutshells, snail-shells,
eagles' claws and feathers, tails and heads of snakes, stones,
roots, herbs, bones of any animal (e.g. small horns of gazelles
or of goats), teeth and claws of leopards, but especially human
bones -- of ancestors or of renowned men, but particularly of
enemies or white men. Newly made graves are rifled for them, and
among the bodily parts most prized are portions of human skulls,
human eyeballs, especially those of white men. But anything may
be chosen -- a stick, string, bead, stone, or rag of cloth.
Apparently there is no limit to the number of spirits; there is
literally no limit to the number and character of the articles
in which they may be confined. As, however, the spirits may quit
the objects, it is not always certain that fetishes possess
extraordinary powers; they must be tried and give proof of their
efficiency before they can be implicitly trusted. Thus,
according to Ellis, the natives of the Gold Coast put their
bohsum in fire as a probation, for the fire never injures the
true bohsum. A fetish then, in the strict sense of the word, is
any material object consecrated by the nganga or magic doctor
with a variety of ceremonies and processes, by virtue of which
some spirit is supposed to become localized in that object, and
subject to the will of the possessor.
These objects are filled or rubbed by the nganga with a mixture
compounded of various substances, selected according to the
special work to be accomplished by the fetish. Its value,
however, depends not on itself, nor solely on the nature of
these substances, but on the skill of the nganga in dealing with
spirits. Yet there is a relation, difficult sometimes for the
foreigner to grasp, between the substances selected and the
object to be attained by the fetish. Thus, to give the possessor
bravery or strength, some part of a leopard or of an elephant is
selected; to give cunning, some part of a gazelle; to give
wisdom, some part of the human brain; to give courage, a portion
of the heart; to give influence, some part of the eye. These
substances are supposed to please and attract some spirit, which
is satisfied to reside in them and to aid their possessor. The
fetish is compounded in secret, with the accompaniment of drums,
dancing, invocations, looking into mirrors or limpid water to
see faces human or spiritual, and is packed into the hollow of
the shell or bone, or smeared over the stick or stone. If power
over some one be desired, the nganga must receive crumbs from
the food, clippings of the finger-nails, some hair, or even a
drop of blood of the person, which is mixed in the compound. So
fearful are the natives of power being thus obtained over them,
that they have their hair cut by a friend; and even then it is
carefully burned, or cast into the river. If one is accidentally
cut, he stamps out the blood that has dropped on the ground, or
cuts away the wood which it has saturated.
The African negro in appealing to the fetish is prompted by fear
alone. There is no confession, no love, rarely thanksgiving. The
being to whom he appeals is not God. True he does not deny that
God is; if asked, he will acknowledge His existence. Very rarely
and only in extreme emergencies, however, does he make an appeal
to Him, for according to his belief God is so far off, so
inaccessible, so indifferent to human wants, that a petition to
Him would be almost vain. He therefore turns to some one of the
mass of spirits whom he believes to be ever near and observant
of human affairs, in which, as former human beings, some of them
once had part. He seeks not spiritual, but purely physical,
safety. A sense of moral and spiritual need is lost sight of,
although not quite eliminated, for he believes in a good and a
bad. But the dominant feeling is fear of possible natural injury
from human or subsidized spiritual enemies. This physical
salvation is sought either by prayer, sacrifice, and certain
other ceremonies rendered to the spirit of the fetish or to
non-localized spirits, or by the use of charms or amulets. These
charms may be material, i. e. fetishes; vocal, e.g. utterances
of cabbalistic words which are supposed to have power over the
local spirits; ritual, e.g. prohibited food, i. e. orunda, for
which any article of food may be selected and made sacred to the
spirit. At night the Congo chief will trace a slender line of
ashes round his hut, and firmly believe that he has erected a
barrier which will protect him and his till morning against the
attacks of the evil spirit.
The African believes largely in preventive measures, and his
fetishes are chiefly of this order. When least conscious, he may
be offending some spirit with power to work him ill; he must
therefore be supplied with charms for every season and occasion.
Sleeping, eating, drinking, he must be protected from hostile
influences by his fetishes. These are hung on the plantation
fence, or from the branches of plants in the garden, either to
prevent theft or to sicken the thief over the doorway of the
house, to bar the entrance of evil; from the bow of the canoe,
to ensure a successful voyage; they are worn on the arm in
hunting to ensure an accurate aim; on any part of the person, to
give success in loving, hating, planting, fishing, buying; and
so through the whole range of daily work and interests. Some
kinds, worn on a bracelet or necklace, ward off sickness. The
new-born infant has a health-knot tied about its neck, wrist, or
loins. Before every house in Whydah, the seaport of Dahomey, one
may perceive a cone of baked clay, the apex of which is
discoloured with libations of palm-oil, etc. To the end of their
lives the people keep on multiplying, renewing, or altering
these fetishes.
In fetish-worship the African negro uses prayer and sacrifice.
The stones heaped by passers-by at the base of some great tree
or rock, the leaf cast from a passing canoe towards a point of
land on the river bank, are silent acknowledgements of the
presence of the ombwiris (i.e. spirits of the place). Food is
offered, as also blood-offerings of a fowl, a goat, or a sheep.
Until recently human sacrifices were offered, e.g. to the sacred
crocodiles of the Niger Delta; to the spirits of the oil-rivers
on the upper Guinea coast, where annual sacrifices of a maiden
were made for success in foreign commerce; the thousands of
captives killed at the "annual custom" of Dahomey for the safety
of the king and nation. In fetishism prayer has a part, but it
is not prominent, and not often formal and public. Ejaculatory
prayer is constantly made in the utterance of cabbalistic words,
phrases, or sentences adopted by, or assigned to, almost every
one by parent or doctor. According to Ellis no coercion of the
fetish is attempted on the Gold Coast, but Kidd states that the
negro of Guinea beats his fetish, if his wishes are frustrated,
and hides it in his waist-cloth when he is about to do anything
of which he is ashamed.
The fetish is used not only as a preventive of or defence
against evil (i. e. white art), but also as a means of offence,
i. e. black art or witchcraft in the full sense, which always
connotes a possible taking of life. The half-civilized negro,
while repudiating the fetish as a black art, feels justified in
retaining it as a white art, i. e. as a weapon of defence. Those
who practise the black art are all "wizards" or "witches" --
names never given to practisers of the white art. The user of
the white art uses no concealment; a practitioner of the black
art denies it, and carries on its practice secretly. The black
art is supposed to consist of evil practices to cause sickness
and death. Its medicines, dances, and enchantments are also used
in the professed innocent white art; the difference is in the
work which the spirit is entrusted to perform. Not every one who
uses white art is able to use also the black art. Anyone
believing in the fetish can use the white art without subjecting
himself to the charge of being a wizard. Only a wizard can cause
sickness or death. Hence witchcraft belief includes witchcraft
murder.
There exists in Bantu a society called the "Witchcraft Company",
whose members hold secret meetings at midnight in the depths of
the forest to plot sickness or death. The owl is their sacred
bird, and their signal-call is an imitation of its hoot. They
profess to leave their corporeal bodies asleep in their huts,
and it is only their spirit-bodies that attend the meeting,
passing through walls and over tree-Lops with instant rapidity.
At the meeting they have visible, audible, and tangible
communications with spirits. They have feasts, at which is eaten
"the heart-life" of some human being, who through this loss of
his "heart" falls sick and dies unless the "heart" be restored.
The early cock-crow is a warning for them to disperse, for they
fear the advent of the morning star, as, should the sun rise
upon them before they reach their corporeal bodies, all their
plans would fail and they would sicken. They dread cayenne
pepper; should its bruised leaves or pods be rubbed over their
corporeal bodies during their absence, their spirits are unable
to re-enter, and their bodies die or waste miserably away. This
society was introduced by black slaves to the West Indies, e.g.
Jamaica and Hayti, and to the Southern States as Voodoo worship.
Thus Voodooism or Odoism is simply African fetishism
transplanted to American soil. Authentic records are procurable
of midnight meetings held in Hayti, as late as 1888, at which
human beings, especially children, were killed and eaten at the
secret feasts. European governments in Africa have put down the
practice of the black art, yet so deeply is it implanted in the
belief of the natives that Dr. Norris does not hesitate to say
it would revive if the whites were to withdraw.
Fetishism in Africa is not only a religious belief; it is a
system of government and a medical profession, although the
religious element is fundamental and colours all the rest. The
fetish-man, therefore, is priest, judge, and physician. To the
believers in the fetish the killing of those guilty of
witchcraft is a judicial act; it is not murder, but execution.
The fetish-man has power to condemn to death. A judicial system
does not exist. Whatever rules there are, are handed down by
tradition, and the persons familiar with these old sayings and
customs are present in the trial of disputed matters. Fetishes
are set up to punish offenders in certain cases where it is
considered specially desirable to make the law operative though
the crimes cannot be detected (e.g. theft). The fetish is
supposed to be able not only to detect but to punish the
transgressor. In cases of death the charge of witchcraft is
made, and the relatives seek a fetish-man, who employs the
ordeal by poison, fire or other tests to detect the guilty
person. Formerly mbwaye (i. e. ordeal by poison) was performed
by giving to the accused a poisonous drink, the accuser also
having to take the test to prove their sincerity. If he vomited
immediately he was innocent; if he was shown guilty, the
accusers were the executioners. On the upper coast of Guinea the
test is a solution of the sassawood, and is called "red water";
at Calahar, the solution of a bean; in the Gabun country, of the
akazya leaf or bark; farther south in the Nkami country, it is
called mbundu. The distinction between poison and fetish is
vague in the minds of many natives, to whom poison is only
another material form of a fetish power. It has been estimated
that for every natural death at least one -- and often ten or
more -- has been executed.
The judicial aspect of fetishism is revealed most plainly in the
secret societies (male and female) of crushing power and
far-reaching influence, which before the advent of the white man
were the court of last appeal for individual and tribal
disputes. Of this kind were the Egho of the Niger Delta, Ukuku
of the Corisco region, Yasi of the Ogowe, M'wetyi of the
Shekani, Bweti of the Bakele, Inda and Njembe of the Mpongwe,
Ukuku and Malinda of the Batanga region. All of these societies
had for their primary object the laudable one of government,
and, for this purpose, they fostered the superstitious dread
with which the fetish was regarded by the natives. But the
arbitrary means employed in their management, the oppressive
influences at work, the false representations indulged in, made
them almost all evil. They still exist among the interior
tribes; on the coast, they have either been entirely suppressed
or exist only for amusement (e.g. Ukuku in Gabun), or as a
traditional custom (e.g. Njembe). The Ukuku society claimed the
government of the country. To put "Ukuku on the white man" meant
to boycott him, i. e. that no one should work for him, no one
should sell food or drink to him; he was not allowed to go to
his own spring. In Dahomey the fetish-priests are a kind of
secret police for the despotic king. Thus, while witchcraft was
the religion of the natives, these societies constituted their
government.
Although sickness is spoken of among the natives as a disease,
yet the patient is said to be sick because of an evil spirit,
and it is believed that when this is driven out by the
magician's benevolent spirit, the patient will recover. When the
heathen negro is sick, the first thing is to call the "doctor"
to find out what spirit by invading the body has caused the
sickness. The diagnosis is made by drum, dance, frenzied song,
mirror, fumes of drugs, consultation of relics, and conversation
with the spirit itself. Next must be decided the ceremony
peculiar to that spirit, the vegetable and mineral substances
supposed to be either pleasing or offensive to it. If these
cannot be obtained, the patient must die. The witch-doctor
believes that his incantations have subsidized the power of a
spirit, which forthwith enters the body of the patient and,
searching through its vitals, drives out the antagonizing spirit
which is the supposed actual cause of the disease. The nkinda,
"the spirit of disease", is then confined by the doctor in a
prison, e.g. in a section of sugar-cane stalk with its leaves
tied together. The component parts of any fetish are regarded by
the natives as we regard the drugs of our materia medica. Their
drugs, however, are esteemed operative not through certain
inherent chemical qualities, but in consequence of the presence
of the spirit to whom they are favourite media. This spirit is
induced to act by the pleasing enchantments of the magic-doctor.
The nganga, as surgeon and physician, shows more than
considerable skill in extracting bullets from wounded warriors,
and in the knowledge of herbs as poisons and antidotes.
Whether the black slaves brought to America the okra or found it
already existing on the continent is uncertain, but the term
gumbo is undoubtedly of African origin, as also is the term
mbenda (peanuts or ground-nuts), corrupted into pindar in some
of the Southern States. The folk-lore of the African slave
survives in Uncle Remus's tales of "Br'er Rabbit". Br'er Rabbit
is an American substitution for Brother Nja (Leopard) or Brother
Iheli (Gazelle) in Paia N'jambi's (the Creator's) council of
speaking animals. Jevons holds that fetishes are private only,
although, in fact, not only individuals, but families and tribes
have fetishes. The fetish Deute at Krakje and Atia Yaw of Okwaou
were known and feared for leagues around. In the Benga tribe of
West Africa the family fetish is known by the name of Yaka. It
is a bundle of the parts of bodies of their dead, i. e. first
joints of fingers and toes, lobe of ear, hair. The value of Yaka
depends on the spirits of the family dead being associated with
the portions of their bodies, and this combination is effected
by the prayer and incantation of the doctor. The Yaka is
appealed to in family emergencies, e.g. disease, death, when
ordinary fetishes fail. This rite is very expensive and may
require a month, during which time all work is suspended.
The observances of fetish-worship fade away into the customs and
habits of everyday life by gradations, so that in some of the
superstitious beliefs, while there may be no formal handling of
a fetish amulet containing a spirit nor actual prayer nor
sacrifice, nevertheless spiritism is the thought and is more or
less consciously held, and consequently the term fetish might
perhaps be extended to them. The superstition of the African
negro is different from that of the Christian, for it is the
practical and logical application of his religion. To the
Christian it is a pitiful weakness; to the negro, a trusted
belief. Thus some birds and beasts are of ill omen, others of
good omen. The mournful hooting of an owl at midnight is a
warning of death, and all who hear the call will hasten to the
wood and drive away the messenger of ill-tidings with sticks and
stones. Hence arises the belief in the power of Ngoi, Moloki,
N'doshi or Uvengwa (i. e., evil-spirited leopard, like the
German werewolf), viz., that certain possessors of evil spirits
have ability to assume the guise of an animal, and reassume at
will the human form. To this superstition must be referred the
reverence shown fetish leopards, hippopotami, crocodiles, sokos
(large monkeys of the gorilla type).
(See AMULET, ANIMISM, DEITY, IDOLATRY, MAGIC, NATURISM,
RELIGION, SPIRITISM, TOTEMISM, SHAMANISM, SYMBOLISM.)
BRINTON, The Religions of Primitive Peoples (New York, 1897);
ELLIS, The Tshi-speaking Peoples of the Gold Coast of W. Africa
(London, 1887); IDEM, The Yomba-speaking Peoples of the
Slave-Coast of W. Africa (London, 1894); FARNELL, Evolution of
Religion (London and New York, 1905); HADDON, Magic and
Fetichism in Religions, Ancient and Modern (London, 1906);
HOeFFDING, The Philosophy of Religion, tr. MEYEA (London and New
York, 1906); JEVONS, Introduction to Study of Comparative
Religion (New York, 1908); KELLOG, Genesis and Growth of
Religion (London and New York, 1892); KIDD, The Essential Kaffir
(London, 1904); KINGSLEY, Travels in West Africa (London, 1898);
IDEM, West African Studies (London, 1899); LEPPEET, Die
Religionen der europaeischen Culturvoelker (Berlin, 1881);
MUeLLER, Natural Religion (London, 1892); IDEM, Origin and
Growth of Religion (London, 1878); NORRIS, Fetichism in W.
Africa (New York, 1904); SCHULTZE, Psychologie der Naturvoelker
(Leipzig, 1900); SPENCER ST. JOHN, Hayti and the Black Republic
(2d ed., London, 1889); TYLOR, Primitive Culture (2d ed.,
London, 1873); WILSON, Western Africa (New York, 1856); AMES,
African Fetichism (Heli Chatelain) in FolkLore (Oct., Dec.,
1894); GLAU, Fetichism in Congo Land in Century (April, 1891);
KINGSLEY, The Fetich View of the Human Soul in Folk-Lore (June,
1897); NIPPESLEY, Fetich Faith in W. Africa in Pop. Sc. Monthly
(Oct., 1887); LE ROY, La religion des primitifs (Paris, 1909).
JOHN T. DRISCOLL.
Francois Feuardent
Franc,ois Feuardent
A Franciscan, theologian, preacher of the Ligue, b. at
Coutanees, Normandy, in 1539; d. at Paris, 1 Jan., 1610. Having
compteted his humanities at Bayeux, he joined the Friars Minor.
After the novitiate, he was sent to Paris to continue his
studies, where he received (1576) the degree of Doctor in
Theology and taught with great success at the university. He
took a leading part in the political and religious troubles in
which France was involved at that time. With John Boucher and
Bishop Rose of Senlis, he was one of the foremost preachers in
the cause of the Catholic Ligue and, as Roennus remarks in an
appendix to Feuardent's "Theomachia", there was not a church in
Paris in which he had not preached. Throughout France and beyond
the frontiers in Lorraine and Flanders, he was an eloquent and
ardent defender of the Faith. Nevertheless even Pierre de
l'Etoile, a fierce adversary of the Ligue, recognises in his
"Memoires" the merits of Feuardent's subsequent efforts in
pacifying the country. In his old age he retired to the convent
of Bayeux, which he restored and furnished with a good library.
His works can be conveniently grouped in three classes: (1)
Scriptural; (2) patristical; (3) controversial. Only some of the
most remarkable may be pointed out here. (1) A new edition of
the medieval Scripturist, Nicholas of Lyra: "Biblia Sacra, cum
glossa ordinaria . . . et postilla Nicolai Lyrani" (Paris,
1590), 6 vols. fol.). He also wrote commentaries on various
books of Holy Scripture, viz on Ruth Esther, Job, Jonas, the two
Epistles of St. Peter, the Epistles of St. Jude and St. James,
the Epistle of St. Paul to Philemon, and others. (2) "S. Irenaei
Lugd. episcopi adversus Valentini . . . haereses libri quinque"
(Paris, 1576); "S. lldephonsi archiepiscopi Toletani de
virginitate Mariae liber" (Paris, 1576). Feuardent also wrote an
introduction and notes to "Michaelis Pselli Dialogus de energia
seu operatione daemonum translatus a Petro Marrello" (Paris,
1577). (3) "Appendix ad libros Alphonsi a Castro (O.F.M.) contra
haereses" (Paris, 1578). "Theomachia Calvinistica", his chief
work is based on some earlier writings, such as: "Semaine
premiere des dialogues auxquels sont examinees et refutees 174
erreurs des Calviniste" (1585); "Seconde semaine des dialogues .
. ." (Paris, 1598); "Entremangeries et guerres mininstrales . .
." (Caen, 1601).
LIVARIUS OLIGER
Baron Ernst von Feuchtersleben
Baron Ernst Von Feuchtersleben
An Austrian poet, philosopher, and physician; born at Vienna, 29
April, 1806; died 3 September, 1849. After completing his course
at the Theresian Academy, he took up the study of medicine in
1825, receiving the degree of Doctor of Medicine in 1833. In
1844 he began a series of free lectures on psychiatry at the
University of Vienna, the next year became dean of the medical
faculty, and in 1847 was made vice-director of
medico-chirurgical studies. In July, 1848, he was appointed
under-secretary of state in the ministry of public instruction,
and in this capacity he attempted to introduce some important
reforms in the system of education, but, discouraged by the
difficulties which he encountered, he resigned in December of
the following year. As a medico-philosophical writer,
Feuchtersleben attained great popularity, especially through his
book "Zur Diaetetik der Seele" (Vienna, 1838), which went
through many editions (46th in 1896). Hardly less famous is his
"Lehrbuch der arztlichen Seelenkunde" (Vienna, 1845), translated
into English by H. Evans Lloyd under the title of "Principles of
Medical Psychology" (revised and edited by B. C. Babington,
London, 1847). He also wrote an essay, "Die Gewissheit und
Wuerde der Heilkunst" (Vienna, 1839), a new edition of which
appeared under the title "Aerzte und Publikum" (Vienna, 1845).
As a poet Feuchtersleben is chiefly known by the well-known
song, "Es ist bestimmt in Gottes Rat", which appeared in
"Gedichte" (Stuttgart, 1836) and was set to music by
Mendelssohn. His later poems are more philosophical and
critical. His essays and other prose writings were published
under the title "Beitraege zur Litteratur-, Kunst- und
Lebenstheorie" (Vienna, 1837-41). His complete works (exclusive
of his medical writings) were edited by Friedrich Hebbel (7
vols., Vienna, 1851-53).
Consult the autobiography prefixed to the above-mentioned
edition; also NECKER, Ernst v. Feuchtersleben, der Freund
Grillparzers in Jahrbuch der Grillparzer-Gesellschaft, III
(Vienna, 1893).
ARTHUR F.J. REMY
Feudalism
Feudalism
This term is derived from the Old Aryan pe'ku, hence Sanskrit
pacu, "cattle"; so also Lat. pecus (cf. pecunia); Old High
German fehu, fihu, "cattle", "property", "money"; Old Frisian
fia; Old Saxon fehu; Old English feoh, fioh, feo, fee. It is an
indefinable word for it represents the progressive development
of European organization during seven centuries. Its roots go
back into the social conditions of primitive peoples, and its
branches stretch out through military, political, and judicial
evolution to our own day. Still it can so far be brought within
the measurable compass of a definition if sufficient allowance
be made for its double aspect. For feudalism (like every other
systematic arrangement of civil and religious forces in a state)
comprises duties and rights, according as it is looked at
central or local point of view. (1) As regards the duties
involved in it, feudalism may be defined as a contractual system
by which the nation as represented by the king lets its lands
out to individuals who pay rent by doing governmental work not
merely in the shape of military service, but also of suit to the
king's court. Originally indeed it began as a military system.
It was in imitation of the later Roman Empire, which met the
Germanic inroads by grants of lands to individuals on condition
of military service (Palgrave, "English Commonwealth", I, 350,
495, 505), that the Carlovingian Empire adopted the same
expedient. By this means the ninth century Danish raids were
opposed by a semi-professional army, better armed and more
tactically efficient than the old Germanic levy. This method of
forming a standing national force by grants of lands to
individuals is perfectly normal in history, witness the Turkish
timar fiefs (Cambridge Modern History, I, iii, 99, 1902), the
fief de soudee of the Eastern Latin kingdoms (Brehier, "L'Eglise
et l'Orient au moyen age", Paris, 1907, iv, 94), and, to a
certain extent, the Welsh uchelwyr (Rhys and Jones, "The Welsh
People", London, 1900, vi, 205). On the whole feudalism means
government by amateurs paid in land rather than professionals
paid in money. Hence, as we shall see, one cause of the downfall
of feudalism was the substitution in every branch of civil life
of the "cash-nexus" for the "land-nexus". Feudalism, therefore,
by connecting ownership of land with governmental work, went a
large way toward solving that ever present difficulty of the
land question; not, indeed, by any real system of land
nationalization, but by inducing lords to do work for the
country in return for the right of possessing landed property.
Thus, gradually, it approximated to, and realized, the political
ideal of Aristotle, "Private possession and common use"
(Politics, II, v, 1263, a). To a certain extent, therefore,
feudalism still exists, remaining as the great justification of
modern landowners wherever, -- as sheriffs, justices of the
peace, etc. -- they do unpaid governmental work. (2) As regards
the rights it creates, feudalism may be defined as a "graduated
system based on land tenure in which every lord judged, taxed,
and commanded the class next below him" (Stubbs, "Constitutional
History", Oxford, 1897, I, ix, 278). One result of this was
that, whenever a Charter of Liberties was wrung by the baronage
from the king, the latter always managed to have his concessions
to his tenants-in-chief paralleled by their concessions to their
lower vassals (cf. Stubbs, "Select Charters", Oxford, 1900, S:
4, 101, 60, 304). Another more serious, less beneficent, result
was that, while feudalism centrally converted the sovereign into
a landowner, it locally converted the landowner into a
sovereign.
Origin
The source of feudalism rises from an intermingling of barbarian
usage and Roman law (Maine, "Ancient Law", London, 1906, ix). To
explain this reference must be made to a change that passed over
the Roman Empire at the beginning of the fourth century. About
that date Diocletian reorganized the Empire by the establishment
of a huge bureaucracy, at the same time disabling it by his
crushing taxation. The obvious result was the depression of free
classes into unfree, and the barbarization of the Empire. Before
A.D. 300 the absentee landlord farmed his land by means of a
familia rustica or gang of slaves, owned by him as his own
transferable property, though others might till their fields by
hired labor. Two causes extended and intensified this organized
slave system: (1) Imperial legislation that two thirds of a
man's wealth must be in land, so as to set free hoarded specie,
and prevent attempts to hide wealth and so escape taxation.
Hence land became the medium of exchange instead of money, i.e.
land was held not by rent but by service. (2) The pressure of
taxation falling on land (tributum soli) forced smaller
proprietors to put themselves under their rich neighbors, who
paid the tax for them, but for whom they were accordingly
obliged to perform service (obsequium) in work and kind. Thus
they became tied to the soil (ascripti glebae), not transferable
dependents. Over them the lord had powers of correction, not
apparently, of jurisdiction.
Meanwhile, the slaves themselves had become also territorial not
personal. Further, the public land (ager publicus) got
memorialized by grants partly to free veterans (as at Colchester
in England), partly to laeti, -- a semi-servile class of
conquered peoples (as the Germans in England under Marcus
Antonius), paying, beside the tributum soli, manual service in
kind (sordida munera). Even in the Roman towns, by the same
process, the urban landlords (curiales) became debased into the
manufacturing population (collegiati). In a word, the middle
class disappeared; the Empire was split into two opposing
forces: an aristocratic bureaucracy and a servile laboring
population. Over the Roman Empire thus organized poured the
Teutonic flood, and these barbarians had also their
organization, rude and changeful though it might be. According
to Tacitus (Germania) the Germans were divided into some forty
civitates, or populi, or folks. Some of these, near the roman
borders, lived under kings, others, more remote, were governed
by folk moots or elective princes. Several of these might
combine to form a "stem", the only bond of which consisted in
common religious rites. The populus, or civitas, on the other
hand, was a political unity. It was divided into pagi, each
pagus being apparently a jurisdictional limit, probably meeting
in a court over which a princeps, elected by the folk moot,
presided, but in which the causes were decided by a body of
freemen usually numbering about a hundred. Parallel with the
pagus, according to Tacitus (Germania, xii), though in reality
probably a division of it, was the vicus, an agricultural unit.
The vicus was (though Seebohm, "English Historical Review",
July, 1892, 444-465 thought not) represented in two types (1)
the dependent village, consisting of the lord's house, and
cottages of his subordinates (perhaps the relics of indigenous
conquered peoples) who paid rent in kind, corn, cattle, (2) the
free village of scatt ered houses, each with its separate
enclosure. Round this village stretched great meadows on which
the villagers pastured their cattle. Every year a piece of new
land was set apart to be plowed, of which each villager got a
share proportioned to his official position in the community. It
was the amalgamation of these two systems that produced
feudalism.
But here, precisely as to the relative preponderance of the
Germanic and Roman systems in manorial feudalism, the discussion
still continues. The question turns, to a certain extent, on the
view taken of the character of the Germanic inroads. The
defenders of Roman preponderance depict these movements as mere
raids, producing indeed much material damage, but in reality not
altering the race or the institutions of the Romanized peoples.
Their opponents, however, speak of these incursions rather as
people-wanderings -- of warriors, women, and children, cattle
even, and slaves, indelibly stamping and molding the
institutions of the race which they encountered. The same
discussion focuses around the medieval manor, which is best seen
in its English form. The old theory was that the manor was the
same as the Teutonic mark, plus the intrusion of a lord (Stubbs,
"Constitutional History", Oxford, 1897, I, 32-71). This was
attacked by Fustel de Coulanges (Histoire des institutions
politiques et de l'ancienne France, Paris, 1901) and by Seebohm
(The English Village Community, London, 1883, viii, 252-316, who
insisted on a Latin ancestry from the Roman villa, contending
for a development not from freedom to serfdom, but from slavery,
through serfdom, to freedom. The arguements of the Latin School
may be thus summarized: (1) the mark is a figment of the
Teutonic brain (cf. Murray's "Oxford English Dictionary", s.v.,
167; "markmoot" probably means "a parsley bed"). (2) early
German law is based on assumption of private ownership. (3)
Analogies of Maine and others from India and Russia not to the
point. (4) Romanized Britons, for example, in south-eastern
Britain had complete manorial system before the Saxons came from
Germany. -- They are thus answered by the Teutonic School
(Elton, Eng. Hist. Rev., July, 1886; Vinogradoff, "Growth of the
Manor", London, 1905, 87, Maitland, "Domesday Book and Beyond",
Cambridge, 1897, 222, 232, 327, 337): (1) the name "mark" may
not be applied in England but the thing existed. (2) It is not
denied that there are analogies between the Roman vill and the
later manor, but analogies do not necessarily prove derivation.
(3) The manor was not an agricultural unit only, it was also
judicial. If the manor originated in the Roman vill, which was
composed of a servile population, how came it that the suitors
to the court were also judges? or that villagers had common
rights over waste land as against their lord? or that the
community was represented in the hundred court by four men and
its reeve? (4) Seebohm's evidence is almost entirely drawn from
the positions of villas and villeins on the demesnes of kings,
great ecclesiastical bodies, or churchmen. Such villages were
admittedly dependent. (5) Most of the evidence comes through the
tainted source of Norman and French lawyers who were inclined to
see serfdom even where it did not exist. On the whole, the
latest writers on feudalism, taking a legal point of view,
incline to the Teutonic School.
Causes
The same cause that produced in the later Roman Empire the
disappearance of a middle class and the confronted lines of
bureaucracy and a servile population, operated on the teutonized
Latins and latinized Teutons to develop the complete system of
feudalism.
(1) Taxation, whether by means of feorm-fultum, danegelt, or
gabelle, forced the poorer man to commend himself to a lord. The
lord paid the tax but demanded in exchange conditions of
service. The service-doing dependent therefore was said to have
"taken his land" to a lord in payment for a tax, which land the
lord restored to him to be held in fief, and this (i.e. land
held in fief from a lord) is the germ-cell of feudalism.
(2) Another, and more outstanding cause, was the royal grant of
fole-land. Around this, too, historians at one time ranged in
dispute. The older view was that fole-land was simply private
land, the authoritative possession of which was based upon the
witness of the people as opposed to the bok-land, with its
written title deeds. But in 1830 John Allen (Rise and Growth of
Royal Prerogative) tried to show that fole-land was in reality
public property, national, waste, or unappropriated land. His
theory was that all land-books (conveyances of land) made by the
Anglo-Saxon kings were simply thefts from the national demesne,
made for the benefit of the king, his favorites, or the Church.
The land-book was an ecclesiastical instrument introduced by the
Roman missionaries, first used by that zealous convert,
Ethelbert of Kent, though not becoming common until the ninth
century. Allen based his theory on two grounds: (a) the king
occasionally books land to himself, which could not therefore
have been his before; (b) the assent of the Witan was necessary
to grants of fole-land, which, therefore, was regarded as a
national possession. To this Professor Vinogradoff (Eng. Hist.
Rev., Jan., 1893, 1-17) made answer: (a) that even the village
knew nothing of common ownership, and that a fortiori, the whole
nation would not have had such an idea; (b) that the king in his
charters never speaks of terram gentis but terram juris sui; (c)
that the land thus conveyed away is often expressly described as
being inhabited, cultivated, etc., and therefore cannot have
been unappropriated or waste land. Finally, Professor Maitland
(Domesday Book and Beyond, Cambridge, 1897, 244) clearly
explains what happened by distinguishing two sorts of ownership,
economic and political. Economic ownership is the right to share
in the agricultural returns of the land, as does the modern
landlord, etc. Political ownership is the right to the judicial
returns from the soil -- ownership, therefore, in the sense of
governing it or exercising ownership over it. By the land-bok,
therefore, land was handed over to be owned, not economically
but politically; and the men suing on the courts of justice,
paying toll, etc., directed their fines, not to the exchequer,
but to the newly-intruded lord, who thus possessed suzerainty
and its fiscal results. In consequence the local lord received
the privilege of the feorm-fultum, or the right to be
entertained for one night or more in progress. So, too, in
Ireland, until the seventeenth century, the chieftains enjoyed
"coigne and livery" of their tribesmen; and in medieval France
there was the lord's droit de gete. This land-tax in kind, not
unnaturally, helped in villeinizing the freemen. Moreover the
king surrendered to the new lord the profits of justice and the
rights of toll, making, therefore, the freeman still more
dependent on hiss lord. However it must also be stated that the
king nearly always retained the more important criminal and
civil cases in his own hands. Still the results of the king's
transference of rights over fole-land was easy enough to
foresee, i.e. the depression of the free village. The steps of
this depression may be shortly set out: (a) the Church or lord
entitled to food-rents established an overseer to collect this
rent in kind. Somehow or other this overseer appropriated land
for a demesne, partly in place of, partly along side of, the
food-rents; (b) the Church or the lord entitled by the land-bok
to jurisdictionl profits made the tenure of land by the
villagers depend upon suit to his court; the villager's
transfers came to be made at that court, and were finally
conceived as having their validity from the gift or grant from
its president.
(3) Meanwhile the action of the State extended this depression
(a) by its very endeavor in the tenth century Capitularies to
keep law and order in those rude cattle-lifting societies. For
the system evolved was that men should be grouped in such a
manner that one man should be responsible for another,
especially the lord for his men. As an example of the former may
be taken the Capitularies of the Frankish kings, such as of
Childebert and Clotaire, and of the English king Edgar. (Stubbs,
Select Charters, 69-74); and of the latter the famous ordinance
of Athelstan (Conc. Treatonlea, c. 930, ii; Stubbs, Select
Charters, Oxford, 1900, 66): "And we have ordained respecting
those lordless men of whom no law can be got, that the hundred
be commanded that they domicile him to folk right and find him a
lord in the folk-moot"; (b) another way was by the institution
of central taxation in the eleventh century -- in England by
means of danegelt, abroad by various gabelles. These were moneta
ry taxes at a time when other payments were still largely made
in kind. Accordingly, just as under the later Roman Empire, the
poorer man commended himself to a lord, who paid for him, but
demanded in stead payment in service, a tributum soli. The
dependent developed into a retainer, as in the Lancastrian days
of maintenance, to be protected by his lord, even in the royal
courts of justice, and repaying his master by service, military
and economic, and by the feudal incidents of herlot, wardship,
etc. (for details of feudal aids, cf. Maitland, Constitutional
history, 27-30)
(4) Nor should it be forgotten that a ceorl or merchant could
"thrive" (Stubbs, Select Charters, 65; probably of eleventh
century date), so as to amass wealth to the loss of his
neighbors, and gradually to become a master of villeins --
possessing a church, a kitchen where the said villeins must bake
their bread (jus furmi), a semi-fortified bell-house and a
burgh-gate where he could sit in judgment.
(5) The last great cause that developed feudalism was war. It is
an old saying, nearly a dozen centuries old, that "war begat the
king". It is no less true that war, not civil, but
international, begat feudalism. First it forced the kings to
cease to surround themselves with an antiquated fyrd or national
militia, that had forgotten in its agricultural pursuits that
rapidity of movement was the first essential of military
success, and by beating the sword into the plowshare had lost
every desire to beat back the iron into its old form. In
consequence a new military force was organized, a professional
standing army. This army had to be fed and housed in time of
peace. As a result its individual members were granted lands and
estates. or lived with the king as his personal suite. At any
rate, instead of every able-bodied man being individually bound
in person to serve his sovereign in the field, the lords or
landowners were obliged in virtue of their tenure to furnish a
certain quantity of fighting men, armed with fixed and definite
weapons, according to the degree, rank and wealth of the
combatant. Secondly, it gave another reason for commendation,
i.e. protection. The lord was now asked, not to pay a tax, but
to extend the sphere of his influence so as to enable a lonely,
solitary farmstead to keep off the attacks of a foe, or at least
to afford a place of retreat and shelter in time of war. This
the lord would do for a consideration, to wit, that the
protected man should acknowledge himself to be judicially,
politically, economically, the dependent of his high protector.
Finally, the king himself was pushed up to the apex of the whole
system. The various lords commended themselves to this central
figure, to aid them in times of stress, for they saw the
uselessness of singly trying to repel a foe. They were
continually being defeated because "shire would not help shire"
(Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, ann. 1010). Thus the very reason why the
English left Ethelred the Unready to accept Sweyn as full king
(Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, ann. 1012) was simply because Ethelred
had no idea of centralizing and unifying the nation; just as in
the contrary sense the successful resistance of Paris to the
Northmen gave to its dukes, the Lords of the Isle of France, the
royal titles which the Carlovingians of Laon were too feeble to
defend; and the lack of a defensive national war prevented any
unification of the unwieldy Holy Roman Empire. This is
effectually demonstrated by the real outburst of national
feeling that centered round one of the weakest of all the
emperors, Frederick III, at the siege of Neuss, simply because
Charles the Bold was thought to be threatening Germany by his
attack on Cologne. From these wars, then, the kings emerged, no
longer as mere leaders of their people but as owners of the land
upon which their people lived, no longer as Reges Francorum but
as Reges Franciae, nor as Duces Normannorum but as Duces
Normanniae, nor as Kings of the Angleycin but of Engla-land.
This exchange of tribal for territorial sovereignty marks the
complete existence of feudalism as an organization of society in
all its relations (economic, judicial, political), upon a basis
of commendation and land-tenure.
Essence
We are now, therefore, in a position to understand what exactly
feudalism was. Bearing in mind the double definition given at
the beginning, we may, for the sake of clearness, resolve
feudalism into its three component parts. It includes a
territorial element, an idea of vassalage, and the privilege of
an immunity.
(1) The territorial element is the grant of the enfeoffment by
the lord to his man. At the beginning this was probably of stock
and cattle as well as land. Hence its etymology. Littre makes
the Low Latin feudum of Teutonic origin, and thus cognate with
the Old High German fihu, Gothic faihu, Anglo-Saxon feoh (our
fee), modern German vieh. That is to say the word goes back to
the day when cattle was originally the only form of wealth; but
it came by a perfectly natural process, when the race had passed
from a nomadic life to the fixity of abode necessitated by
pastoral pursuits, to signify wealth in general, and finally
wealth in land. The cattle, stock, or land was therefore handed
over by the lord to his dependent, to be held, not in full
ownership, but in usufruct, on conditions originally personal
but becoming hereditary. (This whole process can be easily
traced in Hector Monroe Chadwick's "Studies in Anglo-Saxon
Institutions", Cambridge, 1905, ix, 308-354; x, 378-411, where a
detailed account is given of how the thegn, a personal servant
of the king, developed into a landowner possessing an average of
five hides of land and responsible to his sovereign in matters
of war and jurisdiction). The influence of the Church, too, in
this gradual transference of a personal to a territorial
vassalage has been very generally admitted. The monastic houses
would be the first to find it troublesome (Liber Eliensis, 275)
to keep a rout of knights within their cloistral walls. Bishops,
too, howsoever magnificent their palaces, could not fail to wish
that the fighting men whom they were bound by their barony to
furnish to the king should be lodged elsewhere than close to
their persons. Consequently they soon developed the system of
territorial vassalage. Hence the medieval legal maxim: nulle
terre sans seigneur (Vinogradoff, English Society in the
Eleventh Century, Oxford, 1908, ii, 39-89). This enfeoffment of
the lord or landowner by the king and of the dependent by the
lord was partly in the nature of a reward for past services,
partly in the nature of an earnest for the future. It is this
primitive idea of the lord who gives land to his supporter that
is answerable for the feudal incidents which otherwise seem so
tyrannous. For instance, when the vassal died, his arms, horse,
military equipment reverted as heriot to his master. So, too,
when the tenant died without heirs his property escheated to the
lord. If, however, he died with heirs, indeed, but who were
still in their minority, then these heirs were in wardship to
the feudal superior, who could even dispose of a female ward in
marriage to whom he would, on a plea that she might otherwise
unite herself and lands to an hereditary enemy. All the way
along it is clear that the ever present idea ruling and
suggesting these incidents, was precisely a territorial one. The
origin, that is, of these incidents went back to earlier days
when all that the feudal dependent possessed, whether arms, or
stock, or land he had received from his immediate lord. Land had
become the tie that knit up into one the whole society. Land was
now the governing principle of life (Pollack and Maitland,
History of English Law, Cambridge, 1898, I, iii, 66-78). A man
followed, not the master whom he chose or the cause that seemed
most right, but the master whose land he held and tilled, the
cause favored in the geographical limits of his domain. The king
was looked up to as the real possessor of the land of the
nation. By him, as representing the nation, baronies, manors,
knight's fees, fiefs were distributed to the tenants-in-chief,
and they, in turn, divided their land to be held in trust by the
lower vassals (Vinogradoff, English Society in the Eleventh
Century, 42). The statute of Edward I, known from its opening
clause as Quia Emptores, shows the extreme lengths to which this
subinfeudation was carried (Stubbs, Select Charters, 478). So
much, however, had this territorial idea entered into the legal
conceptions of the medieval polity, and been passed on from age
to age by the most skillful lawyers of each generation, that, up
to within the last half century, there were not wanting some who
taught that the very peerages of England might descend, not by
means of blood only, nor even of will or bequest, but by the
mere possession-at-law of certain lands and tenements. Witness
the Berkeley Peerage case of 1861 (Anson, Law and Customs of the
Constitution, Oxford, 1897, Part I, I, vi, 200-203).
(2) Feudalism further implies the idea of vassalage. This is
partly concurrent with, partly overlapping, the territorial
conception. It is certainly prior to, more primitive than, the
notion of a landed enfeoffment. The early banded hordes that
broke over Europe were held together by the idea of loyalty to a
personal chief. The heretogas were leaders in war. Tacitus says
(Germania, vii): "The leaders hold command rather by the example
of their boldness and keen courage than by any force of
discipline or autocratic rule." It was the best, most obvious,
simplest method, and would always obtain in a state of incessant
wars and raids. But even when that state of development had been
passed, the personal element, though considerably lessened,
could not fail to continue. Territorial enfeoffment did not do
away with vassalage, but only changed the medium by which that
vassalage was made evident. The dependent was, as ever, the
personal follower of his immediate lord. He was not merely
holding land of that lord; the very land that he held was but
the expression of his dependence, the outward and visible sign
of an inward and invisible bond. The fief showed who the vassal
was and to whom he owed his vassalage. At one time there was a
tendency among historians to make a distinction between the
theory of feudalism on the Continent and that introduced into
England by William I. But a closer study of both has proved
their identity (Tout, Eng. Hist. Rev., Jan., 1905, 141-143). The
Salisbury Oath, even on the supposition that it was actually
taken by "all the land owning men of account there were all over
England" (Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, ann. 1068), was nothing more
than had been exacted by the Anglo-Saxon kings (Stubbs, Select
Charters, Doom of Exeter, iv, 64; I, 67; but compare
Vinogradoff, Growth of the Manor, Oxford, 1905, 294-306). In
Germany, too, many of the lesser knights held directly of the
emperor; and overall, whether immediately subject to him or not,
he had, at least in theory, sovereign rights. And in France,
where feudal vassalage was very strong, there was a royal court
to which a dependent could appeal from that of his lord, as
there were also royal cases, which none but the king could try.
In fact it was perhaps in France, earlier than elsewhere, that
the centralizing spirit of royal interference began to busy
itself in social, economic, judicial interests of the
individual. Besides, on the other hand, the anarchy of Stephen's
reign that spread over the whole country (Davis, Eng. Hist.
Rev., Oct. 1903) showed how slight even in England was the royal
hold over the vassal barons. Moreover, if English feudalism did
at all differ from the hierarchic vassalage that caused so much
harm abroad, the result was due far more to Henry II and his
successors than to the Norman line of kings. And even the work
of the Angevins was to no small degree undone by the policy of
Edward III. The Statutes of Merton (1278), Mortmain (1279), Quia
Emptores (1290) all laid the foundations, though such, of
course, was foreign to their object, for the aggregations of
lage estates. Then came the marriage of the royal princes to
great heiresses; the Black Prince gained the lands of Kent;
Lionel, the dowry of Ulster; Thomas of Woodstock the linked
manors of Eleanor Bohun. Henry IV, before he deposed Richard II,
was "Harry of Hereford, Lancaster, and Derby", as well as
Leicester and Lincoln. The result was that England, no less than
France, Germany, Italy, and Spain had it's feudal vassals that
acquired ascendency over the crown, or were only prevented by
their mutual jealousy from doing so. In England, too, the
substitution of a feodalite apanagee, or nobility of the blood
royal, for the old feodalite territoriale worked the same
mischief as it did in France; and the Wars of the Roses
paralleled the fatal feuds of Burgundians and Armagnacs, the
horrors of the Praguerie and the anarchy of the League of the
Public Weal. It will be seen, therefore, that all over Europe
the same feudal system prevailed of a hierarchic arrangement of
classes, of some vast pyramid of which the apex, pushed high up
and separated by intervening layers from its base, represented
the king.
(3) Feudalism lastly included an idea of an immunity or grants
of the profits of justice over a fief or other pieces of land
(Vinogradoff, Eng. Soc. in the Eleventh Century, 177-207). We
have already stated how by the land books the Anglo-Saxon kings
(and the like had been done and was to be repeated all over the
Continent) granted to others political ownership over certain
territories that till that time had been in the medieval phrase,
"doing their own law". The result was that, apparently, private
courts were set up typified in England by the alliterative
jingle "sac and soc, toll and theam, and infangenthef".
Sometimes the lord was satisfied by merely taking the judicial
forfeitures in the ordinary courts, without troubling to
establish any of his own. But, generally speaking, he seems to
have had the right and to have used it, of keeping his own
separate courts. Feudalism, therefore, includes not merely
service (military and economic) but also suit (judicial). This
suit was as minutely insisted upon as was the service. The king
demanded from his tenants-in-chief that they should meet in his
curia regis. So William I had his thrice yearly crown-wearings,
attended by "all the rich men over all England, archbishops and
bishops, abbots and earls, thegns and knights" (Anglo-Saxon
Chronicle, ad ann, 1087). So too, in France there was the cour
du roy, dating from the earliest Capetian times, the court of
the king's demesne or immediate tenants; at this royal court,
whether in England or in France, all the tenants-in-chief, at
any rate in the days of the full force of feudalism, were
obliged to attend. The same court existed in the Holy Roman
Empire and was of great importance, at least till the death of
Henry V (Bryce, Holy Roman Empire, London, 1904, viii, 120-129).
All those who attended these courts did so in virtue of the
tenurial obligations. Now, these royal councils were not
constitutional bodies, for we have no evidence of any
legislation by them. Rather, like the Parlement in France, they
simply registered the royal edicts. But their work was judicial,
adjudicating causes too numerous or too complicated for the king
alone to deal with. So Phillip Augustus summoned John as a
vassal prince to the cour du roy to answer the charge of the
murder of Arthur of Brittany. Just as these royal courts were
judicial bodies for dealing with questions relating to the
tenants-in-chief, so these tenants-in-chief, and in a descending
gradation ever y lord and master, had their private courts in
which to try the cases of their tenants. The private criminal
courts were not strictly feudal, but dependent on a royal grant;
such were the franchises, or liberties, or regalities, as in the
counties Palatine up and down Europe. Besides these however,
there were the librae curiae, courts baron, courts leet, courts
customary, and, in the case of the Church, courts Christian (for
details, Pollock and Maitland, History of English Law, I,
571-594). The very complexity of these courts astonishes us; it
astonished contemporaries no less, for Langland, in "Piers
Plowman" (Passus III, ii, 318-319) looks forward to a golden day
when
King's court and common court, consistory and chapter,
All shall be one court and one baron judge.
Church and Feudalism
The Church, too, had her place in the feudal system. She too was
granted territorial fiefs, became a vassal, possessed
immunities. It was the result of her calm, wide sympathy,
turning to the new nations, away from the Roman Empire, to which
many Christians thought she was irrevocably bound. By the
baptism of Clovis she showed the baptism of Constantine had not
tied her to the political system. So she created a new world out
of chaos, created the paradox of barbarian civilization. In
gratitude kings and emperors endowed her with property; and
ecclesiastical property has not infrequently brought evils in
its train. The result was disputed elections; younger sons of
nobles were intruded into bishoprics, at times even into the
papacy. Secular princes claimed lay investiture of spiritual
offices. The cause of this was feudalism, for a system that had
its basis on land tenure was bound at last to enslave a Church
that possessed great landed possessions. In Germany, for
example, three out of the mystically numbered seven electors of
the empire were churchmen. There were, besides, several
prince-bishops within the empire, and mitered abbots, whose rule
was more extended and more powerful than that of many a secular
baron. A s it was in Germany, so it was in France, England,
Scotland, Spain, etc. Naturally there was a growing desire on
the part of the king and the princes to force the Church to take
her share in the national burdens and duties. Moreover, since by
custom the secular rulers had obtained the right of presentation
to various benefices or the right of veto, with the title on the
Continent of advocates or vogt, the numerous claimants for the
livings were only too ready to admit every possible demand of
their lord, if only he would permit them to possess the
bishopric, abbacy, or whatever else it might be. In short, the
Church was in danger of becoming the annex of the State; the
pope, of becoming the chaplain of the emperor. Simony and
concubinage were rife. Then came the Reforms of Cluny and the
remedy of the separation of Church and State, in this sense,
that the Church would confer the dignity or office, and the
State the barony. But even when this concordat had been arranged
(in England between Henry I and Saint Anselm in 1107; the
European settlement did not take place until 1122 at Worms), the
Church still lay entangled with feudalism. It had to perform its
feudal duties. It might owe suit and service to a lord.
Certainly, lesser vassals owed suit and service to it. So it was
brought into the secular fabric of society. A new tenure was
invented for it, tenure by frankalmoyn. But it had more often
than not to provide its knights and war-men, and to do justice
to its tenants. The old ideal of a world-monarchy and a
world-religion, the pope as spiritual emperor, the emperor as
temporal pope, as set out with matchless skill in the fresco of
the Dominican Church in Florence; S. Maria Novella, had ceased
to influence public opinion long before Dante penned his "De
Monarchia". Feudalism had shattered that ideal (Barry, in Dublin
Review, Oct., 1907, 221-243). There was to be not so much a
universal Church as a number of national Churches under their
territorial princes, so that feudalism in the ecclesiastical
sphere prepared the way for the Renaissance principle, Cujus
regio, ejus religio. For while at the beginning the Church
sanctified the State and anointed with sacred chrism the king
vested in priestly apparel, in the end the State secularized the
Church amid the gilded captivity of Avignon. Royal despotism
followed the indignities of Anagni; the Church sank under the
weight of her feudal duties.
Results
(1) Evil Results
(a) The State instead of entering into direct relations with
individuals, entered into relation with heads of groups, losing
contact with the members of those groups. With a weak king or
disputed succession, these group-heads made themselves into
sovereigns. First of all viewing themselves as sovereigns they
fought with one another as sovereigns, instead of coming to the
State as to the true sovereign to have their respective claims
adjudicated. The result was what chroniclers called guerra, or
private war (Coxe, House of Austria, I, London, 1807, 306-307).
This was forbidden in England even under its mock form the
tournament. Still, it was too much tangled with feudalism to be
fully suppressed, breaking out as fiercely here from time to
time as it did elsewhere.
(b) The group-heads tempted their vassals to follow them as
against their overlords. So Robert of Bellesme obtained the help
of his feudatories against Henry I. So Albert of Austria headed
the electors against the Emperor Adolph of Nassau. So Charles of
Navarre led his vassals against King John of France. So James of
Urgel formed the Privileged Union of Saragossa.
(c) These group-heads claimed the right of private coinage,
private castles, full judicial authority, full powers of
taxation. There was always a struggle between them and their
sovereigns, and between them and their lesser vassals as to the
degree of their independence. Each manorial group, or honour, or
fief endeavored to be self sufficient and to hold itself apart
from its next overlord. Each overlord endeavored more and more
to consolidate his domains and force his vassals to appeal to
him rather than to their direct superior. This continual
struggle, the success and failure of which depended on the
personal characters of lord and overlord, was the chief cause of
the instability of life in medieval times.
(d) A last evil may perhaps be added in the power given to the
Church. In times of disputed succession the Church claimed the
right to, defend herself, then to keep order, and eventually to
nominate the ruler. This, however justifiable in itself and
however at times beneficial, often drove the ecclesiastical
order into the arms of one or other political party; and the
cause of the Church often became identified with a particular
claimant for other than Church reasons; and the penalties of the
Church, even Excommunication were at times imposed to defend
worldly interests. As a rule, however, the influence of the
Church was directed to control and soften the unjust and cruel
elements of the system.
(2) Good Results
(a) Feudalism supplied a new cohesive force to the nations. At
the break-up alike of the Roman Empire and the Germanic tribal
loyalty to the tribal chief, a distinct need was felt for some
territorial organization. As yet the idea of nationality was
non-existent, having indeed little opportunity of expression.
How then were the peoples to be made to feel their distinct
individuality? Feudalism came with its ready answer, linked
Germanic with Roman political systems, built up an
inter-connected pyramid that rested on the broad basis of
popular possession and culminated in the apex of the king.
(b) It introduced moreover into political life the bond of
legalitas. Every war of medieval, or rather feudal, times was
based on some legal claim, since other casus belli there was
none. Political expediency or national expansion were unknown
doctrines. No doubt this legalitas as in the English claim to
the French throne, often became sheer hypocrisy. Yet on the
whole it gave a moral restraint to public opinion in the midst
of a passionate age; and the inscription on the simp le tomb of
Edward I: Pactum Serva, however at times disregarded by the king
himself, still sums up the great bulwark raised inmedieval days
against violence and oppression. To break the feudal bond was
felony; and more, it was dishonor. On the side of the king or
lord, there was the investiture by banner, lance, or other
symbol; on the side of the man or tenant, homage for the land,
sworn on bended knees with hands placed between the hands of the
lord, the tenant standing upright while taking the fealty, as
the sign of a personal obligation.
(c) Feudalism gave an armed force to Europe when she lay
defenseless at the feet of the old mountains over which so many
peoples had wandered to conquer the Western world. The onrush of
Turk, Saracen, and Moor was checked by the feudal levy which
substituted a disciplined professional force for the national
fyrd or militia (Oman, Art of War, IV, ii, 357-377, London,
1898).
(d) From a modern point of view its most interesting advantage
was the fact of its being a real, if only temporary, solution of
the land question. It enforced a just distribution of the
territorial domains included within the geographical limits of
the nation, by allowing individuals to carve out estates for
themselves on condition that each landlord, whether secular
baron, churchman, even abbess, rendered suit and service to his
overlord and demanded them in return from each and every vassal.
This effectually taught the principle that owners of land,
precisely as such, had to perform in exchange governmental work.
Not that there was exactly land nationalization (though many
legal and theological expressions of medieval literature seem to
imply the existence of this), but that the nation was paid for
its land by service in war and by administrative, judicial, and
later, by legislative duties.
Decline of Feudalism
This was due to a multiplicity of causes acting upon one
another. Since feudalism was based on the idea of land tenure
paid for by governmental work, every process that tended to
alter this adjustment tended also to displace feudalism.
(1) The new system of raising troops for war helped substitute
money for land. The old system of feudal levy became obsolete.
It was found impracticable for the lords to retain a host of
knights at their service, waiting in idleness for the call of
war. Instead, the barons, headed by the Church, enfeoffed these
knights on land which they were to own on conditions of service.
Gradually these knights, too, found military service exceedingly
inopportune and commuted for it a sum of money, paid at first to
the immediate lord, eventually demanded directly by the king.
Land ceased to have the same value in the eyes of the monarch.
Money took its place as the symbol of power. But this was
further increased by a new development in military organization.
The system by which sheriffs, by virtue of royal writs, summoned
the county levy had taken the place of the older arrangements.
These commissions of array, issued to the tenants-in-chief, or
proclaimed for the lesser vassals in all courts, fairs, and
markets, were now exchanged for indentures, by which the king
contracted with individual earls, barons, knights, etc, to
furnish a fixed number of men at a fixed wage ("They sell the
pasture now to buy the horse." -- "Henry V", Prologue to Act
II). The old conception of the feudal force had completely
disappeared. Further, by means of artillery the attacking force
completely dominated the defensive, fortified castles declined
in value, archers and foot increased in importance, heavily
armored knights were becoming useless in battle, and on the
Continent the supremacy of harquebuses and pike was assured.
Moreover, as part of this military displacement the reaction
against livery and maintenance (cf. Lingard, History of England,
IV, v, 139-140, London, 1854) must be noted. The intense evils
occasioned all over Europe by this bastard feudalism, or
feudalism in caricature, provoked a fierce reaction. In England
and on the Continent the new monarchy that sprang from the
"Three Magi" of Bacon stimulated popular resentment against the
great families of king-makers and broke their power.
(2) A second cause of this substitution was the Black Death. For
some years the emancipation of villeinage had, for reasons of
convenience, been gradually extending. A system had grown up of
exchanging tenure by rent for tenure by service, i.e. money was
paid in exchange for service, and the lord's fields were tilled
by hired laborers. By the Great Pestilence labor was rendered
scarce and agriculture was disorganized. The old surplus
population that had ever before (Vinogradoff in Eng. Hist. Rev.,
Oct.,1900, 775-781; April, 1906, 356) drifted from manor to
manor no longer existed. The lords pursued their tenants;
capital was begging from labor. All statutory enactments to
chain labor to the soil proved futile. Villeins escaped in
numbers to manors, not of their own lords, and entered into
service, this time as hired laborers. That is, the lord became a
landlord, the villein became a tenant farmer at will or a
landless laborer. Then came the Peasant Revolt all over Europe,
the economic complement of the Black Death, by which the old
economy was broken up and from which the modern social economy
began. On the Continent the result was the metayer system or
division of national wealth among small landed proprietors. In
England under stock and land leases the same system prevailed
for close on a century, then disappeared, emerging eventually
after successive ages as our modern "enclosed" agriculture.
(3) As in things military and economic, so also in things
judicial the idea of landed administrative (sic) sinks below the
horizon. All over Europe legal kings, Alphonso the Wise, Phillip
the Fair, Charles of Bohemia, Edward I of England, were
rearranging the constitutions of their countries. The old curia
regis or cour du roy ceases to be a feudal board of
tenants-in-chief and becomes, at first partly, then wholly, a
body of legal advisors. The king's chaplains and clerks, with
their knowledge of civil and canon law, able to spell out the
old customaries, take the place of grim warriors. The Placita
Regis or cas royaux get extended and simplified. Appeals are
encouraged. Civil as well as criminal litigations come into the
royal courts. Finance, the royal auditing of the accounts of
sheriffs, bailiffs, or seneschals, increases the royal hold on
the country, breaks down the power of the landed classes, and
draws the king and peoples into alliance against the great
nobles. The shape of society is no longer a pyramid but two
parallel lines. It can no longer be represented as broadening
down from king to nobles, from nobles to people; but the apex
and base have withdrawn, the one from completing, the other from
supporting the central block. The rise to power of popular
assemblies, whether as States General, Cortes, Diets, or
Parliaments, betokens the growing importance of the middle class
(i.e. of the moneyed, not landed proprietors) is the overthrow
of feudalism. The whole literature of the fourteenth century and
onward witnesses to this triumph. Henceforward, to the
Renaissance, it is eminently bourgeois. Song is no longer an
aristocratic monopoly; it passes out into the whole nation. The
troubadour is no more; his place is taken by the ballad writer
composing in the vulgar tongue a dolce stil nuovo. This new tone
is especially evident in "Renard le Contrefait" and "Branche des
Royaux Lignage". These show that the old reverence for all that
was knightly and of chivalry was passing away. The medieval
theory of life, thought, and government had broken down.
Stubbs, Constitutional history (Oxford, 1897); Seebohm, English
Village Community (London, 1883); Pollock and Maitland, History
of English Law (Cambridge, 1898); Maitland, Constitutional
History, (Cambridge, 1908), 141-164; Vinogradoff, English
Society in the Eleventh Century, (Oxford, 1908); Round, Feudal
England, (London, 1895), 225-314; Baldwin, Scutage and Knight
Service (Chicago, 1897); Roth, Geschichte des Beneficialwesens
(Erlangen, 1850); Waitz, Deutsche Verfassungsgeschichte (Berlin,
1880); Lippert, Die deutchen Lehnbuecher (Leipzig, 1903);
Rhamen, Die Grosshufen der Nordgermanen (Brunswick, 1905);
Luchaire, Histoire des Institutions (Paris, 1883-85);
Petit-Deutaillis, Histoire Constitutionelle (1907) tr. Rhodes,
(1908); Seignobos in Lavisse and Rambaud, Histoire General, II,
(Paris, 1893), I, 1-64; Guilmeroz, Essai sur d'origine de la
noblesse en France, (Paris, 1902); Flach, Les origines de
l'Ancienne France, III (Paris, 1904).
BEDE JARRETT
Feuillants
Feuillants
The Cistercians who, about 1145, founded an abbey in a shady
valley in the Diocese of Rieux (now Toulouse) named it Fuliens,
later Les Feuillans or Notre-Dame des Feuillans (Lat. folium,
leaf), and the religious were soon called Feuillants (Lat.
Fulienses). Relaxations crept into the Order of Citeaux as into
most religious congregations, and in the sixteenth century the
Feuillant monastery was dishonoured by unworthy monks. A reform
was soon to be introduced, however, by Jean de la Barriere, b.
at Saint-Cere, in the Diocese of Cahors, 29 April, 1544; d. 25
April, 1600. Having completed a successful course in the
humanities at Toulouse and Bordeaux, at the age of eighteen he
was made commendatory Abbot of the Feuillants by the King of
France, succeeding Charles de Crussol, who had just joined the
Reformers. After his nomination he went to Paris to continue his
studies, and then began his lifelong friendship with the
celebrated Arnaud d'Ossat, later cardinal. In 1573 Barriere,
having resolved to introduce a reform into his abbey, took the
habit of novice, and after obtaining the necessary
dispensations, made his solemn profession and was ordained
priest, some time after 8 May, 1573. His enterprise was a
difficult one. There were twelve monks at Les Feuillans who
refused to accept the reform, and unmoved by the example and
exhortations of their abbot, resolved to do away with him, by
means of poison. Their attempts, however, were frustrated. In
1577, having received the abbatial benediction, he solemnly
announced his intention of reforming his monastery, and made the
members of the community understand that they had either to
accept the reform or leave the abbey; they chose the latter and
dispersed to various Cistercian houses. Their departure reduced
the community to five persons, two professed clerics, two
novices, and the superior. The rule was interpreted in its most
rigid sense and in many ways even surpassed. Sartorius in his
work "Cistercium bis-tertium" sums up the austerities of the
reform in these four points: (1) The Feuillants renounced the
use of wine, fish, eggs, butter, salt, and all seasoning. Their
nourishment consisted of barley bread, herbs cooked in water,
and oatmeal. (2) Tables were abolished; they ate on the floor
kneeling. (3) They kept the Cistercian habit, but remained
bare-headed and barefoot in the monastery. (4) They slept on the
ground or on bare planks, with a stone for pillow. They slept
but four hours. Silence and manual labour were held in honour.
The community was increased rapidly by the admission of fervent
postulants.
In 1581 Barriere received from Gregory XIII a Brief of
commendation and in 1589 one of confirmation, establishing the
Feuillants as a separate congregation. In spite of the
opposition of the abbots and general chapters of Citeaux, the
reform waxed strong. In 1587 Sixtus V called the Feuillants to
Rome, where he gave them the church of S. Pudentiana, and the
same year, Henry III, King of France, constructed for them the
monastery of St. Bernard, in the Rue Saint-Honore, Paris. In
1590, however, the Peasants' War brought about dissensions.
While Barriere remained loyal to Henry III, the majority of his
religious declared for the League. As a result, in 1592 Barriere
was condemned as a traitor to the Catholic cause, deposed, and
reduced to lay communion. It was not until 1600 that, through
the efforts of Cardinal Bellarmine, he was exonerated and
reinstated. Early in the same year, however, he died in the arms
of his friend Cardinal d'Ossat. In 1595 Clement VIII exempted
the reform from all jurisdiction on the part of Cistercian
abbots, and allowed the Feuillants to draw up new constitutions,
containing some mitigations of the primitive rigour. These were
approved the same year. In 1598 the Feuillants took possession
of a second monastery in Rome, San Bernardo alle Terme. In 1630
Pope Urban VIII divided the congregation into two entirely
distinct branches: that of France, under the title of Notre-Dame
des Feuillants; and that of Italy, under the name of Bernardoni
or Reformed Bernardines. In 1634 the Feuillants of France, and
in 1667 the Bernardines of Italy modified somewhat the
constitutions of 1595. In 1791 at the time of the suppression of
the religious orders, the Feuillants possessed twenty-four
abbeys in France; almost all the religious were confessors,
exiles, or martyrs. The Bernardines of Italy eventually combined
with the Order of Citeaux. The congregation of the Feuillatns
has given a number of illustrious personages to the Church,
among others: Cardinal Bona, the celebrated liturgist and
ascetical writer (d. 1674); Gabriele de Castello (d. 1687),
general of the Italian branch, who also received the cardinal's
hat; Dom Charles de Saint-Paul, first general of the Feuillants
of France, afterwards Bishop of Avranche, who published in 1641
the "Geographia Sacra"; among theologians, Pierre Comagere (d.
1662), Laurent Apisius (d. 1681), and Jean Goulu (d. 1629).
Special mention should be made of Carlo Giuseppe Morozzi
(Morotius), author of the most important history of the order,
the "Cistercii reflores centis ... chronologica historia". Many
martyrologies give Jean de la Berriere (25 April) the title of
Venerable. The Abbey des Feuillants was authorized by papal
Brief to publicly venerate his remains, but the cause of
beatification has never been introduced.
The Feuillantines, founded in 1588 by Jean de la Barriere,
embraced the same rule and adopted the same austerities as the
Feuillants. Matrons of the highest distinction sought admission
into this severe order, which soon grew in numbers, but during
the Revolution, in 1791, the Feuillantines disappeared.
HElyot, Hist. des ordres (Paris, 1719); Caretto, Santorale del
S. Ordine Cisterciense (Turin, 1708); Sartorius, Cistercium
bis-tertium (Prague, 1700); Bazy, Vie du Venerable Jean de la
Barriere (Toulouse, 1885); Morotius, Cistercii reflorescentis
... chronologica historia (Turin, 1690); Chalemot, Serie
Sanctorum et Beatorum S. O. Cist. (Paris, 1670); Gallia
Christiana, XIII; Janauschek, Orig. Cist. (Vienna, 1877); Voyage
litteraire de deux religieux de la cong. de S. Maur in MartEne
and Durand (Paris, 1717); Jongelinus, Notitia abbatiarum Ord.
Cist. (Cologne, 1640).
Edmond M. Obrecht.
Louis Feuillet
Louis Feuillet
(FEUILLEE)
Geographer, b. at Mane near Forcalquier, France, in 1660; d. at
Marseilles in 1732. He entered the Franciscan Order and made
rapid progress in his studies, particularly in mathematics and
astronomy. He attracted the attention of members of the Academy
of Sciences and in 1699 was sent by order of the king on a
voyage to the Levant with Cassini to determine the geographical
positions of a number of seaports and other cities. The success
of the undertaking led him to make a similar journey to the
Antilles. He left Marseilles, 5 Feb., 1703, and arrived at
Martinique 11 April. A severe sickness was the cause of
considerable delay, but in September of the following year he
began a cruise along the northern coast of South America, making
observations at numerous ports. He likewise collected a number
of botanical specimens. Upon his return to France in 1706, his
work won recognition from the Government, and he immediately
began preparations for a more extended voyage along the western
coast of South America to continue his observations. He received
the title of royal mathematician, and armed with letters from
the ministry set sail from Marseilles, 14 Dec., 1707. He rounded
Cape Horn after a tempestuous voyage and visited the principal
western ports as far north as Callao. At Lima he spent several
months studying the region. He returned to France in 1711,
bringing with him much valuable data and a collection of
botanical specimens. Louis XIV granted him a pension and built
an observatory for him at Marseilles. Feuillet was of a gentle
and simple character, and while an enthusiastic explorer, was
also a true ecclesiastic. He was the author of "Journal des
observations physiques, mathematiques, et botaniques" (Paris,
1714); "Suite du Journal" (Paris, 1725).
HENRY M. BROCK
Paul-Henri-Corentin Feval
Paul-Henri-Corentin Feval
Novelist, b. at Rennes, 27 September, 1817; d. in Paris, 8 March
1887. He belonged to an old family of barristers, and his
parents wished him to follow the family traditions. He received
his secondary instruction at the lycee of Rennes and studied law
at the university of the same city. He was admitted to the bar
at the age of nineteen, but the loss of first case disgusted him
with the practice of law, and he went to Paris, where he secured
a position as a bank clerk. His fondness for reading which
caused him to neglect his professional duties, led to his
dismissal a few months later. He is next found in the service of
an advertising concern, then then on the staff of an obscure
Parisian paper, and finally as proof-reader in the offices of
"Le Nouvelliste." He had already begun to write. A short story,
"Le club des Phoques", which he published in "La Revue de
Paris", in 1841, attracted attention and opened to Feval the
columns of the most important Parisian newspapers. In 1844,
under the pseudonym of Francis Trolopp, he wrote "Les mysteres
de Londres", which had great success and was translated into
several languages. From this time on he hardly ever censed
writing, sometimes publishing as many as four novels at a time.
Some of them he also tried to adapt for stage but, with the
exception of "Le Bossu" which had played many times, his
ventures in that direction were unsuccessful. Feval's writings
had not always been in conformity with the teachings of the
Church. In the early seventies he sincerely returned to his
early belief, and between 1877 and 1882 published a revised
edition of all his books. He also wrote some new works which
show the change. His incessant labour and the financial reverses
he had suffered told on his constitution; he was stricken with
paralysis. The Societe des Gens de Letteres, of which he was the
president, had him placed in the home of Les Freres de Jean de
Dieu, where he died.
Most of Feval's novels are romantic; in fact he may be
considered as the best imitator of the elder Dumas; his
fecundity, his imagination, and his power of interesting the
reader rival those of his great predecessor; the style, however,
too often betrays the haste in which his novels were written.
The list of his works is a very long one; the best known besides
those already mentioned are: "Etapes d' une conversion" (Paris,
1877); "Merveilles du Mont-Saint-Michael" (Paris, 1879).
PIERRE MARQUE
Benito Jeronimo Feyjoo y Montenegro
Benito Jeronimo Feyjoo y Montenegro
A celebrated Spansh writer, b. at Casdemiro, in the parish of
Santa Maria de Molias, Galicia, Spain, 8 October, 1676, d. at
Oviedo, 26 September, 1764. Intended by his parents for a
literary career, he showed from a very early age a predilection
for ecclesiastical studies, and in 1688 received the cowl of the
Order of St. Benedict at the monastery of San Juan de Samos. A
man of profound learning, Feyjoo wrote on a great variety of
subjects, embracing nearly every branch of human knowledge. In
his writings he attacked many old institutions, customs,
superstitions. He criticized, among other things, the system of
public instruction in Spain, offering suggestions for reforms;
and it was owing to his agitation that many universities adopted
new and better methods of teaching logic, physics, and medicine.
He naturally stirred up many controversies and was the object of
bitter attacks, but he was not without his supporters and
defenders. In his long life he wrote many works, the full list
of which may be found in Vol. LVI of "La Biblioteca de Autores
Espanoles" (Madrid, 1883). The subjects may be conveniently
grouped as follows: arts, astronomy and geography; economics,
philosophy and metaphysics; philology; mathematics and physics;
cultural history; literature, history, medicine. Nearly all are
included in the eight volumes which bear the title "Teatro
critico universal o discursos varios en todo genero de materias
para desengano de errores comunes" (Madrid, 1726-39) and in the
five volumes of his "Cartas Eruditas" (Madrid, 1742-60). During
the life of the author his works were translated into French,
Italian, German, and after his death into English. At his death
Feyjoo was laid to rest in the church of San Vicente at Oviedo.
A fine statue in his memory ornaments the entrance to the
National Library at Madrid.
VENTURA FUENTES
St. Fiacc
St. Fiacc
(Lived about 415-520.) A poet, chief bishop of Leinster, and
founder of two churches. His father, MacDara, was prince of the
Hy-Bairrche in the country around Carlow. His mother was sister
of Dubhtach, the chief bard and brehon of Erin, the first of
Patrick's converts at Tara, and the apostle's lifelong friend.
Fiacc was a pupil to his uncle in the bardic profession and soon
embraced the Faith. Subsequently, when Patrick came to Leinster,
he sojourned at Dubhtach's house in Hy-Kinsellagh and selected
Fiacc, on Dubhtach's recommendation, to be consecrated bishop
for the converts of Leinster. Fiacc was then a widower; his wife
had recently died, leaving him one son named Fiacre. Patrick
gave him an alphabet written with his own hand, and Fiacc
acquired with marvellous rapidity the learning necessary for the
episcopal order. Patrick consecrated him, and in after time
appointed him chief bishop of the province. Fiacc founded the
church of Domnach-Fiech, east of the Barrow. Dr. Healy
identifies its site at Kylebeg. To this church Patrick presented
sacred vestments, a bell, the Pauline Epistles and pastoral
staff. After many years of austere life in this place, Fiacc was
led by angelic command to remove to the west of the Barrow, for
there "he would find the place of his resurrection". The legends
state that he was directed to build his oratory where he should
meet a hind, his refectory where he should find a boar. He
consulted Patrick, the latter fixed the site of his new church
at Sletty--"the highland"--a mile and a half northwest of
Carlow. Here while built a large monastery, which he ruled as
abbot while at the same time he governed the surrounding country
as bishop. His annual Lenten retreat to the cave of Drum-Coblai
and the rigours of his Lenten fast, on five barley loaves mixed
with ashes, are mentioned in his life by Jocelyn of Furness. He
suffered for many years from a painful disease and Patrick,
commiserating his infirmity, sent him a chariot and a pair of
horses to help him in the visitation of the diocese. He lived to
a very old age; sixty of his pious disciples were gathered to
their rest before him. His festival ha been always observed on
the 12th of October. He was buried in his own church at Sletty,
his son Fiacre, whom Patrick had ordained priest, occupying the
same grave. They are mentioned in several calendars as jointly
revered in certain churches.
St. Fiacc is the reputed author of the metrical life of St.
Patrick in Irish, a document of undoubted antiquity and of prime
importance as the earliest biography of the saint that has come
down to us. A hymn on St. Brigid, "Audite virginis laudes", has
been sometimes attributed to him, but on insufficient grounds.
C. MULCAHY
St. Fiacre
St. Fiacre
Abbot, born in Ireland about the end of the sixth century; died
18 August, 670. Having been ordained priest, he retired to a
hermitage on the banks of the Nore of which the townland
Kilfiachra, or Kilfera, County Kilkenny, still preserves the
memory. Disciples flocked to him, but, desirous of greater
solitude, he left his native land and arrived, in 628, at Meaux,
where St. Faro then held episcopal sway. He was generously
received by Faro, whose kindly feelings were engaged to the
Irish monk for blessings which he and his father's house had
received from the Irish missionary Columbanus. Faro granted him
out of his own patrimony a site at Brogillum (Breuil) surrounded
by forests. Here Fiacre built an oratory in honour of the
Blessed Virgin Mary, a hospice in which he received strangers,
and a cell in which he himself lived apart. He lived a life of
great mortification, in prayer, fast, vigil, and the manual
labour of the garden. Disciples gathered around him and soon
formed a monastery. There is a legend that St. Faro allowed him
as much land as he might surround in one day with a furrow; that
Fiacre turned up the earth with the point of his crosier, and
that an officious woman hastened to tell Faro that he was being
beguiled; that Faro coming to the wood recognized that the
wonderworker was a man of God and sought his blessing, and that
Fiacre henceforth excluded women, on pain of severe bodily
infirmity, from the precincts of his monastery. In reality, the
exclusion of women was a common rule in the Irish foundations.
His fame for miracles was widespread. He cured all manner of
diseases by laying on his hands; blindness, polypus, fevers are
mentioned, and especially a tumour or fistula since called "le
fic de S. Fiacre".
His remains were interred in the church at Breuil, where his
sanctity was soon attested by the numerous cures wrought at his
tomb. Many churches and oratories have been dedicated to him
throughout France. His shrine at Breuil is still a resort for
pilgrims with bodily ailments. In 1234 his remains were placed
in a shrine by Pierre, Bishop of Meaux, his arm being encased in
a separate reliquary. In 1479 the relics of Sts. Fiacre and
Kilian were placed in a silver shrine, which was removed in 1568
to the cathedral church at Meaux for safety from the destructive
fanaticism of the Calvinists. In 1617 the Bishop of Meaux gave
part of the saint's body to the Grand Duke of Tuscany, and in
1637 the shrine was again opened and part of the vertebrae given
to Cardinal Richelieu. A mystery play of the fifteenth century
celebrates St. Fiacre's life and miracles. St. John of Matha,
Louis XIII, and Anne of Austria were among his most famous
clients. He is the patron of gardeners. The French cab derives
its name from him. The Hotel de St-Fiacre, in the Rue St-Martin,
Paris, in the middle of the seventeenth century first let these
coaches on hire. The sign of the inn was an image of the saint,
and the coaches in time came to be called by his name. His feast
is kept on the 30th of August.
C. MULCAHY
Marsilio Ficino
Marsilio Ficino
A philosopher, philologist, physician, b. at Florence, 19 Oct.,
1433; d. at Correggio, 1 Oct, 1499. Son of the physician of
Cosmo de' Medici, he served the Medicis for three generations
and received from them a villa at Monte Vecchio. He studied at
Florence and at Bologna; and was specially protected in his
early work by Cosmo de' Medici, who chose him to translate the
works of Plato into Latin. The Council of Florence (1439)
brought to the city a number of Greek scholars, and this fact,
combined with the founding of the Platonic Academy, of which
Ficino was elected president, gave an impetus to the study of
Greek and especially to that of Plato. Ficino became an ardent
admirer of Plato and a propagator of Platonism, or rather
neo-Platonism, to an unwarranted degree, going so far as to
maintain that Plato should be read in the churches, and claiming
Socrates and Plato as fore-runners of Christ. He taught Plato in
the Academy of Florence, and it is said he kept a light burning
before a bust of Plato in his room. It is supposed that the
works of Savonarola drew Ficino closer to the spirit of the
Church. He was ordained priest in 1477 and became a canon of the
cathedral of Florence. His disposition was mild, but at times he
had to use his knowledge of musle to drive away melancholy. His
knowledge of medicine was applied very largely to himself,
becoming almost a superstition in its detail. As a philologist
his worth was recognized and Renchlin sent him pupils from
Germany. Angelo Poliziano was one of his pupils.
As a translator his work was painstaking and falthful, though
his acquaintance with Greek and Latin was by no means perfect.
He translated the "Argo-nautica", the "Orphic Hymns", Homer's
"Hymns", and Hesiod's "Theogony"; his translation of Plato
appeared before the Greek text of Plato was published. He also
translated Plotinus, Porphyry, Proclus, Iamblichus, Alcinous,
Synesius, Psellus, the "Golden Thoughts" of Pythagoras, and the
works of Dionysius the Areopagite. When a young man he wrote an
"Introduction to the Philosophy of Plato"; his most important
work was "Theologia Platonica de animarum lmmortalitate"
(Florence, 1482); a shorter form of this work is found in his
"Compendium theologiae Platonicae". He respects Aristotle and
calls St. Thomas the "glory of theology"; yet for him Plato is
the philosopher. Christianity, he says, must rest on philosophic
grounds; in Plato alone do we find the arguments to support its
claims, hence he considers the revival of Plato an intervention
of Providence. Plato does not stop at immediate causes, but
rises to the highest cause, God, in Whom he sees all things. The
Philosophy of Plato is a logical outcome of previous thought,
beginning with the Egyptians and advancing step by step till
Plato takes up the mysteries of religion and casts them in a
form that made it possible for the neo-Platonist to set them
forth clearly. The seed is to be found in Plato, its full
expression in the neo-Platonists. Ficino follows this line of
thought in speaking of the human soul, which he considered as
the image of the God-head, a part of the great chain of
existence coming forth from God and leading back to the same
source, giving us at the same time a view of the attributes of
God of his relations to the world. His style is not always
clear. Perhaps his distinctive merit rests on the fact that he
introduced Platonic philosophy to Europe. Besides the works
already mentioned, he left: "De religione Christiana et fidei
pietate", dedicated to Lorenzo de' Medici; "In Epistolas Pauli
commentaria", Marsilii Ficini Epistolae (Venice, 1491; Florence,
1497). His collected works: Opera (Florence,1491, Venice, 1516,
Basel, 1561).
M. SCHUMACHER
Julius Ficker
Julius Ficker
(More correctly Caspar von Ficker).
Historian, b. at Paderborn, Germany, 30 April, 1826; d. at
Innsbruck, 10 June, 1902. He studied history and law at Bonn,
Muenster, and Berlin, and during 1848-49 lived in
Frankfort-on-the-Main, where he was closely associated with the
noted historian, Bohmer who proved himself a generous friend and
patron. In 1852 he proceeded to Bonn, but shortly afterwards
accepted an invitation from Count Leo Thun, the reorganizer of
the Austrian system of education, to settle at Innsbruck as
professor of general history. In 1863, however, he joined the
faculty of jurisprudence, and his lectures on political and
legal history drew around him a large circle of devoted and
admiring pupils. In 1866 he was elected member of the Academy of
Sciences, but retired, after being ennobled by the Emperor of
Austria, in 1879. His numerous and important works extend over
three branches of scientific history (i.e. political and legal
history and the science of diplomacy), and in each division he
discovered new methods of investigation. Among his writings
those of especial note are: "Rainald von Dassel, Reichskanzler
und Erzbischof von Koeln" (Cologne, 1850); "Muensterische
Chroniken des Mittelalters" (Muenster, 1851); "Engelbert der
Heilige, Erzbischof von Koeln" (Cologne, 1853); "Die Ueberreste
des deutschen Reichsarchivs in Pisa" (Vienna, 1855). The second
division of his works includes "Ueber einen Spiegel deutscher
Leute" (Vienna, 1857); "Uber die Entstehungszeit des
Sachsenspiegels" (Innsbruck 1859); "Vom Reichsfuerstenstande"
(Innsbruck, 1861); "Forschunzen zur Reichs-u. Rechtsgeschichte
Italiens" (4 vols, Innsbruck, 1868-74); "Untersuchunsgen zur
Rechtsgeschichte" (3 vols., Innsbruck, 1891-97). Finally he
proved himself a master in diplomatics in his "Beitraege zur
Urkundenlehre" (2 vols., Innsbruck, 1877-78). During the period
1859-1866, he was engaged in a literary controversy with the
historian, Heinrich von Sybel, on the significance of the German
Empire. Ficker advocated and defended the theory that Austria,
on account of its blending of races, was best fitted as
successor of the old empire to secure the political advancement
both of Central Europe and of Germany. In support of his theory,
he wrote "Das deutsche Kaiserreich in seinen universalen und
nationalen Beziehungen" (Innsbruck, 1871), and "Deutsches
Koenigtum und Kaisertum" (Innsbruck, 1872). As legatee of
Bohmer's literary estate, he published the "Acta Imperii
selecta" (lnnsbruck, 1870) and directed the completion and
revision of the "Regesta Imperii".
PATRICUS SCHLAGER
Fideism
Fideism
(Latin fides, faith).
A philosophical term meaning a system of philosophy or an
attitude of mind, which, denying the power of unaided human
reason to reach certitude, affirms that the fundamental act of
human knowledge consists in an act of faith, and the supreme
criterion of certitude is authority.
Fideism has divers degrees and takes divers forms, according to
the field of truth to which it is extended, and the various
elements which are affirmed as constituting the authority. For
some fideists, human reason cannot of itself reach certitude in
regard to any truth whatever; for others, it cannot reach
certitude in regard to the fundamental truths of metaphysics,
morality, and religion, while some maintain that we can give a
firm supernatural assent to revelation on motives of credibility
that are merely probable. Authority, which according to fideism
is the rule of certitude, has its ultimate foundation in divine
revelation, reserved and transmitted in all ages through society
and manifested by tradition, common sense or some other agent of
a social character. Fideism was maintained by Huet, Bishop of
Avranches, in his work "De imbecillitate mentis humanae"
(Amsterdam, 1748); by de Bonald, who laid great stress on
tradition in society as the means of the transmission of
revelation and the criterion of certitude; by Lamennais, who
assigns as a rule of certitude the general reason (la raison
generale) or common consent of the race (Defense de l'essai sur
l'indifference, chs. viii, xi); by Bonnetty in "Annales de
philosophie chretienne"; by Bautain, Ventura, Ubaghs, and others
at Louvain. These are sometimes called moderate fideists, for,
though they maintained that human reason is unable to know the
fundamental truths of the moral and religious orders, they
admitted that, after accepting the teaching of revelation
concerning them, human intelligence can demonstrate the
reasonableness of such a belief. (cf. Ubaghs, Logicae seu
Philosophiae rationalis elementa, Louvain, 1860).
In addition to these systematic formulae of fideism, we find
throughout the history of philosophy from the time of the
sophists to the present day a fideistic attitude of mind, which
became more or less conspicuous at different periods. Fideism
owes its origin to distrust in human reason, and the logical
sequence of such an attitude is scepticism. It is to escape from
this conclusion that some philosophers, accepting as a principle
the impotency of reason, have emphasized the need of belief on
the part of human nature, either asserting the primacy of belief
over reason or else affirming a radical separation between
reason and belief, that is, between science and philosophy on
the one hand and religion on the other. Such is the position
taken by Kant, when he distinguishes between pure reason,
confined to subjectivity, and practical reason, which alone is
able to put us by an act of faith in relation with objective
reality. It is also a fideistic attitude which is the occasion
of agnosticism, of positivism, of pragmatism and other modern
forms of anti-intellectualism. As against these views, it must
be noted that authority, even the authority of God, cannot be
the supreme criterion of certitude, and an act of faith cannot
be the primary form of human knowledge. This authority, indeed,
in order to be a motive of assent, must be previously
acknowledged as being certainly valid; before we believe in a
proposition as revealed by God, we must first know with
certitude that God exists, that He reveals such and such a
proposition, and that His teaching is worthy of assent, all of
which questions can and must be ultimately decided only by an
act of intellectual assent based on objective evidence. Thus,
fideism not only denies intellectual knowledge, but logically
ruins faith itself.
It is not surprising, therefore, that the Church has condemned
such doctrines. In 1348, the Holy See proscribed certain
fideistic propositions of Nicholas d'Autrecourt (cf. Denzinger,
Enchiridion, 10th ed., nn. 553-570). In his two Encyclicals, one
of September, 1832, and the other of July, 1834, Gregory XVI
condemned the political and philosophical ideas of Lamenais. On
8 September, 1840, Bautain was required to subscribe to several
propositions directly opposed to Fideism, the first and the
fifth of which read as follows: "Human reason is able to prove
with certitude the existence of God; faith, a heavenly gift, is
posterior to revelation, and therefore cannot be properly used
against the atheist to prove the existence of God"; and "The use
of reason precedes faith and, with the help of revelation and
grace, leads to it." The same proposition were subscribed to by
Bonnetty on 11 June, 1855 (cf. Denzinger, nn. 1650-1652). In his
Letter of 11 December, 1862, to the Archbishop of Munich, Pius
IX, while condemning Frohschammer's naturalism, affirms the
ability of human reason to reach certitude concerning the
fundamental truths of the moral and religious order (cf.
Denzinger, 1666-1676). And, finally, the Vatican Council teaches
as a dogma of Catholic faith that "one true God and Lord can be
known with certainty by the natural light of human reason by
means of the things that are made" (Const., De Fide Catholica",
Sess. III, can. i, De Revelatione; cf. Granderath,
"Constitutiones dogmaticae Conc. Vatic.", Freiburg, 1892, p. 32
cf. Denzinger, n. 1806).
As to the opinion of those who maintain that our supernatural
assent is prepared for by motives of credibility merely
probable, it is evident that it logically destroys the certitude
of such an assent. This opinion was condemned by Innocent XI in
the decree of 2 March, 1679 (cf. Denzinger, n. 1171), and by
Pius X in the decree "Lamentabili sane" n. 25: "Assensus fidei
ultimo innititur in congerie probabilitatum" (The assent of
faith is intimately based on a sum of probabilities).
Revelation, indeed, is the supreme motive of faith in
supernatural truths, yet, the existence of this motive and its
validity has to be established by reason. No one will deny the
importance of authority and tradition or common consent in human
society for our knowledge of natural truths. It is quite evident
that to despise the teaching of the sages, the scientific
discoveries of the past, and the voice of common consent would
be to condemn ourselves to a perpetual infancy in knowledge, to
render impossible any progress in science, to ignore the social
character of man, and to make human life intolerable: but, on
the other hand, it is an error to make these elements the
supreme criteria of truth, since they are only particular rules
of certitude, the validity of which is grounded upon a more
fundamental rule. It is indeed true that moral certitude differs
from mathematical, but the difference lies not in the firmness
or validity of the certainty afforded, but in the process
employed and the dispositions required by the nature of the
truths with which they respectively deal. The Catholic doctrine
on this question is in accord with history and philosophy.
Rejecting both rationalism and fideism, it teaches that human
reason is capable (physical ability) of knowing the moral and
religious truths of the natural order; that it can prove with
certainty the existence of God, the immortality of the soul, and
can acknowledge most certainly the teaching of God; that,
however, in the present conditions of life, it needs (of moral
necessity) the help of revelation to acquire a sufficient
knowledge of all the natural truths necessary to direct human
life according to the precepts of natural religion (Conc.
Vatic., "De Fide Cath.", cap. ii; cf. St. Thomas, "Cont. Gent.",
Lib. I, c, iv). PERRONE, Praelectiones theologicae, vol. I: De
ver Religione; OLLE-LAPRUNE, De la Certitude Morale (5th ed.,
Paris, 1905); MERCIER, Crit riologie g n rale (4th ed., Louvain,
1900), III, ch. i; JOHN RICKABY, The First Principles of
Knowledge (4th ed., London, 1901), chs. xii, xiii.
G.M. SAUVAGE
St. Fidelis of Sigmaringen
St. Fidelis of Sigmaringen
Born in 1577, at Sigmaringen, Prussia, of which town his father
Johannes Rey was burgomaster; died at Sevis, 24 April, 1622. On
the paternal side he was of Flemish ancestry. He pursued his
studies at the University of Freiburg in the Breisgau, and in
1604 became tutor to Wilhelm von Stotzingen, with whom he
travelled in France and Italy. In the process for Fidelis's
canonization Wilhelm von Stotzingen bore witness to the severe
mortifications his tutor practised on these journeys. In 1611 he
returned to Freiburg to take the doctorate in canon and civil
law, and at once began to practise as an advocate. But the open
corruption which found place in the law courts determined him to
relinquish that profession and to enter the Church. He was
ordained priest the following year, and immediately afterwards
was received into the Order of Friars Minor of the Capuchin
Reform at Freiburg, taking the name of Fidelis. He has left an
interesting memorial of his novitiate and of his spiritual
development at that time in a book of spiritual exercises which
he wrote for himself. This work was re-edited by Father Michael
Hetzenauer, O.F.M. Cap., and republished in 1893 at Stuttgart
under the title: "S. Fidelis a Sigmaringen exercitia seraphicae
devotionis". From the novitiate he was sent to Constance to
finish his studies in theology under Father John Baptist, a
Polish friar of great repute for learning and holiness. At the
conclusion of his theological studies Fidelis was appointed
guardian first of the community at Rheinfelden, and afterwards
at Freiburg and Feldkirch. As a preacher his burning zeal earned
for him a great reputation.
From the beginning of his apostolic career he was untiring in
his efforts to convert heretics nor did he confine his efforts
in this direction to the pulpit, but also used his pen. He wrote
many pamphlets against Calvinism and Zwinglianism though he
would never put his name to his writings. Unfortunately these
publications have long been lost. Fidelis was still guardian of
the community at Feldkirch when in 1621 he was appointed to
undertake a mission in the country of the Grisons with the
purpose of bringing back that district to the Catholic Faith.
The people there had almost all gone over to Calvinism, owing
partly to the ignorance of the priests and their lack of zeal.
In 1614 the Bishop of Coire had requested the Capuchins to
undertake missions amongst the heretics in his diocese, but it
was not until 1621 that the general of the order was able to
send friars there. In that year Father Ignatius of sergamo was
commissioned with several other friars to place himself at the
disposal of this bishop for missionary work, and a similar
commission was given to Fidelis who however still remained
guardian of Feldkirche. Before setting out on this mission
Fidelis was appointed by authority of the papal nuncio to reform
the Benedictine monastery at Pfafers. He entered upon his new
labours in the true apostolic spirit. Since he first entered the
order he had constantly prayed, as he confided to a
fellow-friar, for two favours: one, that he might never fall
into mortat sin; the other, that he might die for the Faith. In
this Spirit he now set out, ready to give his life in preaching
the Faith. He took with him his crucifix, Bible, Breviary, and
the book of the rule of his order; for the rest, he went in
absolute poverty, trusting to Divine Providence for his daily
sustenance. He arrived in Mayenfeld in time for Advent and began
at once preaching and catechizing; often preaching in several
places the same day. His coming aroused strong opposition and he
was frequently threatened and insulted. He not only preached in
the Catholic churches and in the public streets, but
occasionally in the conventicles of the heretics. At Zizers one
of the principal centres of his activity, he held conferences
with the magistrates and chief townsmen, often far into the
night. They resulted in the conversion of Rudolph de Salis, the
most influential man in the town, whose public recantation was
followed by many conversions.
Throught the winter Fidelis laboured indefatigably and with such
success that the heretic preachers were seriously alarmed and
set themselves to inflame the people against him by representing
that his mission was political rather than religious and that he
was preparing the way for the subjugation of the country by the
Austrians. During the Lent of 1622 he preached with especial
fervour. At Easter he returned to Feldkirch to attend a chapter
of the order and settle some affairs of his community. By this
time the Congregation of the Propaganda had been established in
Rome, and Fidelis was formally constituted by the Congregation,
superior of the mission in the Grisons. He had, however, a
presentiment that his laborers would shortly be brought to a
close by a martyr's death. Preaching a farewell sermon at
Feldkirch he said as much. On re-entering the country of the
Grisons he was met everywhere with the cry: "Death to the
Capuchins!" On 24 April, being then at Grusch, he made his
confession and afterwards celebrated Mass and preached. Then he
set out for Sevis. On the way his companions noticed that he was
particularly cheerful. At Sevis he entered the church and began
to preach, but was interrupted by a sudden tumult both within
and without the church. Several Austrian soldiers who were
guarding the doors of the church were killed and Fidelis himself
was struck. A Calvinist present offered to lead him to a place
of security. Fidelis thanked the man but said his life was in
the hands of God. 0utside the church he was surrounded by a
crowd led by the preachers who offered to save his life if he
would apostatize. Fidelis replied: "I came to extirpate heresy,
not to embrace it", whereupon he was struck down. He was the
first martyr of the Congregation of Propaganda. His body was
afterwards taken to Feldkirch and buried in the church of his
order, except his head and left arm, which were placed in the
cathedral at Coire. He was beatified in 1729, and canonized in
1745. St. Fidelis is usually represented in art with a crucifix
and with a wound in the head; his emblem is a bludgeon. His
feast is kept on 24 April.
FATHER CUTHBERT
Fiesole
Fiesole
DIOCESE OF FIESOLE (FAESULANA).
Diocese in the province of Tuscany, suffragan of Florence. The
town is of Etruscan origin, as may be seen from the remains of
its ancient walls. In pagan antiquity it was the seat of a
famous school of augurs, and every year twelve young men were
sent thither from Rome to study the art of divination. Sulla
colonized it with veterans, who afterwards, under the leadership
of Manlius, supported the cause of Catiline. Near Fiesole the
Vandals and Suevi under Radagaisus were defeated (405) by hunger
rather than by the troops of Stilicho. During the Gothic War
(536-53) the town was several times besieged. In 539 Justinus,
the Byzantine general, captured it and razed its fortifications.
In the early Middle Ages Fiesole was more powerful than Florence
in the valley below, and many wars arose between them. In 1010
and 1025 Fiesole was sacked by the Florentines, and its leading
families obliged to take up their residence in Florence.
According to local legend the Gospel was first preached at
Fiesole by St. Romulus, a disciple of St. Peter. The fact that
the ancient cathedral (now the Abbazia Fiesolana) stands outside
the city is a proof that the Christian origins of Fiesole date
from the period of the persecutions. The earliest mention of a
Bishop of Fiesole is in a letter of Gelasius I (492-496). A
little later, under Vigilius (537-55), a Bishop Rusticus is
mentioned as papal legate at one of the Councils of
Constantinople. The legendary St. Alexander is said by some to
belong to the time of the Lombard King Autari (end of the sixth
century), but the Bollandists assign him to the reign of Lothair
(middle of the ninth century). A very famous bishop is St.
Donatus, an Irish monk, the friend and adviser of Emperors Louis
the Pious and Lothair. He was elected in 826 and is buried in
the cathedral, where his epitaph, dictated by himself, may still
be seen. He founded the abbey of San Martino di Mensola; Bishop
Zanobi in 890 founded that of St. Michael at Passignano, which
was afterwards given to the Vallombrosan monks. Other bishops
were Hildebrand of Lucca (1220), exiled by the Florentines; St.
Andrew Corsini (1352), born in 1302 of a noble Florentine
family, and who, after a reckless youth, became a Carmelite
monk, studied at Paris, and as bishop was renowned as a
peacemaker between individuals and States. He died 6 January,
1373, and was canonized by Urban VIII. Other famous bishops were
the Dominican Fra Jacopo Altovita (1390), noted for his zeal
against schism; Antonio Aglio (1466), a learned humanist and
author of a collection of lives of the saints; the Augustinian
Guglielmo Bachio (1470), a celebrated preacher, and author of
commentaries on Aristotle and on the "Sentences" of Peter
Lombard; Francesco Cataneo Diaceto (1570), a theologian at the
Council of Trent and a prolific writer; Lorenzo della Robbia
(1634), who built the seminary. Among the glories of Fiesole
should be mentioned the painter Lorenzo Monaco (1370-1424). But
the greatest name associated with the history of the city is
that of Blessed Giovanni Angelico, called da Fiesole
(1387-1455). His baptismal name was Guido, but, entering the
convent of the Reformed Dominicans at Fiesole, he took the name
of Giovanni in religion; that of Angelico was afterwards given
to him in allusion to the beauty and purity of his works.
The Cathedral of St. Romulus was built in 1028 by Bishop Jacopo
Bavaro with materials taken from several older edifices; it
contains notable sculptures by Mino da Fiesole. The old
cathedral became a Benedictine abbey, and in course of time
passed into the hands of the regular canons of Lateran. It once
possessed a valuable library, long since dispersed. The abbey
was closed in 1778. The diocese has 254 parishes and 155,800
souls. Within its limits there are 12 monasteries of men,
including the famous Vallombrosa, and 24 convents for women.
The principal holy places of Fiesole are: (1) the cathedral (Il
Duomo), containing the shrine of St. Romulus, martyr, according
to legend the first Bishop of Fiesole, and that of his martyred
companions, also the shrine of St. Donatus of Ireland; (2) the
Badia or ancient cathedral at the foot of the hill on which
Fiesole stands, supposed to cover the site of the martyrdom of
St. Romulus; (3) the room in the bishop's palace where St.
Andrew Corsini lived and died; (4) the little church of the
Primerana in the cathedral square, where the same saint was
warned by Our Lady of his approaching death; (5) the church of
S. Alessandro, with the shrine of St. Alexander, bishop and
martyr; (6) the monastery of S. Francesco on the crest of the
hill, with the cells of St. Bernardine of Siena and seven
Franciscan Beati; (7) S. Girolamo, the home of Venerable Carlo
dei Conti Guidi, founder of the Hieronymites of Fiesole (1360);
(8) S. Domenico, the novice-home of Fra Angelico da Fiesole and
of St. Antoninus of Florence; (9) Fontanelle, a villa near S.
Domenico where St. Aloysius came to live in the hot summer
months, when a page at the court of Grand Duke Francesco de'
Medici; (10) Fonte Lucente, where a miraculous crucifix is
greatly revered. A few miles distant is (11) Monte Senario, the
cradle of the Servite Order, where its seven holy founders lived
in great austerity and were cheered at their death by the songs
of angels; also (12) S. Martino di Mensola, with the body of St.
Andrew, an Irish saint, still incorrupt.
CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia (Venice, 1846), XVII, 7-72;
AMMIRATO, Gli Vescovi di Fiesole (Florence, 1637); PHILLIMORE,
Fra Angelico (London, 1881).
U. BENIGNI
Francisco de Figueroa
Francisco de Figueroa
A celebrated Spanish poet, surnamed "the Divine", b. at Alcala
de Henares, c. 1540, d. there, 1620. Little is known of his life
except that he was of noble family, received his education at
the University of Alcala, and followed a military career for a
time, taking part in campaigns in Italy and Flanders. From a
very early age Figueroa showed unusual poetical talent, and his
poems are full of fire and passion. His work first attracted
attention in Italy, where he resided for a time, but it was not
long before he had earned a brilliant reputation in his own
country. Following in the footsteps of Boscan Almogaver and
Garcilaso, to whose school he belonged, he wrote pastoral poems
in the Italian metres, and was one of the first Spanish poets
who used with much success blank verse, which had been
introduced by Boscan in 1543. His best-known and most likely
praised work is the eclogue "Tirsis", written entirely in blank
verse. He was highly praised by Cervantes in his "Galatea". It
is unfortunate that but a small part of the works of this
brilliant poet have reached us, the greater portion having been
burned by his direction just before his death. A small part,
however, was preserved and published by Louis Tribaldos de
Toledo, at Lisbon in 1625. They were reprinted in 1785 and again
in 1804. The best of Figueroa's works appear in "La Biblioteca
de Auctores Espanoles" of Rivadeneira, vol XLII.
TICKNOR, History of Spanish Literature (3 vols., New York,
1849).
VENTURA FUENTES
Francisco Garcia de la Rosa Figueroa
Francisco Garcia de la Rosa Figueroa
Franciscan, b. in the latter part of the eighteenth century at
Toluca, in the Archdiocese of Mexico; date of death unknown.
Figueroa possessed extraordinary administrative powers and for
more than forty years directed the affairs of his order with
singular prudence and ability, being lector emeritus of his
order, prefect of studies of the college of Tlaltelulco,
superior of general convents, definitor, custodian, twice
provincial of the province of Santo Evangelio, and visitor to
the other provinces of New-Spain. He was much beloved by the
people and highly esteemed by the viceroys and bishops. On 21
Feb., 1790, a royal order was received directing that all
documents shedding light on the history of New Spain should be
copied and sent to Spain, the order designating in some
instances special documents which were wanted. D. Juan Vincente
de Guemes Pacheco de Padilla, second Count of Revillagigedo,
viceroy from 1789 to 1794, entrusted to Father Figueroa the work
od selecting, arranging, and copying these manuscripts. To this
task Father Figueroa brought such marvellous activity and rare
judgment, both in selecting the material and the copyists, that
in less than three years he turned over to the Government
thirty-two folio volumes of almost a thousand pages each, in
duplicate, containing copies of original documents collected
from the archives of convents and private collections, for the
most part almost forgotten, and of greatest value for the
knowledge of political and ecclesiastical history of the
provinces. Such a collection contained quite inevitably some
material not of the first importance; there were documents of
all kinds, but the collection as a whole was one of great value.
One copy, which was sent to Spain and examined by the chronicler
Munoz, is preserved in the Academia de Historia; the other was
kept in Mexico in the Secretaria del Virreinado, and from there
was transferred to the general archives of the Palacio Nacional
where it is still kept. The first volume of this was missing,
but about 1872 a copy of it was made from that preserved in
Madrid. To the original thirty-two volumes another was added,
compiled years afterwards by some Franciscans, which contains a
minute index of the contents of the work. Two other copies of
the thirty-two volumes were found; one is in Mexico, the
property of Senor Agueda, and the other in the United States in
the H.H. Bancroft collection.
As this work of Figueroa's has never been published it may be of
interest to summarize the contents of the different volumes.
They are as follows: I. Thirty fragments from the Museo de
Boturini, among them four letters from Father Salvatierra. II.
Treatise on political virtues by D. Carlos Sigueenza; life and
matyrdom of the children of Tlaxcala; narrative of Mexico by
Father Geronimo Salmeron, Father Velez, and others. III. Report
of Father Posadas on Texas; three fragments on ancient history,
Canticles of Netzahualcoyotl, etc. IV. Narrative of
Ixtlixochitl. V-VI. Conquest of the Kingdom of New Galicia by D.
Matias de la Mota Padilla. VII-VIII. Introduction to the history
of Michoacan. IX-X-XI. Chronicle of Michoacan by Fray Pablo
Beaumont. XII. Mexican Chronicle by D. Hernando Alvarado
Tezozomoc. XIII. History of the Chichimces by Ixtlilxochitl.
XIV. Reminiscences of the City of Mexico. Reminiscences for tlie
history of Sinaloa. XVI-XVII. Notes for the history of Sonora.
XVIII. Important letters to elucidate the history of Sonora and
Snaloa. XIX-XX. Documents for the history of New vizcaya
(Durango). XXI. Establishment and progress of the Missions of
Old California. XXII-XXIII. Notes on New California. XXIV.
Log-book kept by the Fathers Garces, Barbastro, Font, and
Capellio; voyage of the frigate "Santiago"; "Diario" of Urrea
and of D.J.B. Anza, etc. XXV-XXVI. Documents for the
ecclesiastical and civil history of New Mexico. XXVII-XXVIII.
Documents for the civil and ecclesiastical history of the
Province of Texas. XXIX. Documents for the history of Coahuila
and Central Mexico (Seno Mexicano). XXX. Tampico, Rio Verde, and
Nuevo Leon. XXXI. Notes on the cities of Vera Cruz, Cordova,
Oaxaca, Puebla, Tepotzotlan, Queretaro, Guanajuato, Guadalajara,
Zacatecas, Nootka. XXXII. Pious reminiscences of the Indian
nation.
CAMILLUS CRIVELLI
Francesco Filelfo
Franscesco Filelfo
A humanist, b. at Tolentino, 25 July, 1398; d. at Florence 31
July, 1481. He studied grammar, rhetoric, and Latin literature
at Padua, where he was appointed professor at the age of
eighteen. In 1417 he was invited to teach eloquence and moral
philosophy at Venice, where the rights citizenship were
conferred upon him. Two years later he was appointed secretary
tot he Venetian consul-general at Constantinople. Arriving there
in 1420, he at once began the study of Greek under John
Chrysoloras, whose daughter he afterwards married, and he was
received with great favour by the Emperor John Palaeologus, by
whom he was employed on several important diplomatic missions.
In 1427, receiving an invitation to the chair of eloquence at
Venice, Filelfo returned there with a great collection of Greek
books. The following year he was called to Bologna and in 1429
to Florence, where he was received with the greatest enthusiasm.
During his five years residence there he engaged in numerous
quarrels with the Florentine scholars and incurred the hatred of
the Medici, so that in 1434 he was forced to leave the city. He
went to Siena and later to Milan, where he was welcomed by
Filippo Maria Visconti, who showered honours upon him. Some
years later, after Milan had been forcibly entered by Francesco
Storza, Filelfo wrote a history of Storza's life in a Latin epic
poem of sixteen books, called the "Storziad". In 1474 he left
Milan to accept a professorship at Rome, where, owing to a
disagreement with Sixtus IV, he did not remain long. He went
back to Milan, but left there in 1481 to teach Greek at
Florence, having long before become reconciled with the Medici.
He died in poverty only a fortnight after his arrival. The
Florentines buried him in the church of the Annunziata. Filelfo
was the most restless of all the humanists, as is indicated by
the number of places at which he taught. He was a man of
indefatigable activity but arrogant, rapacious, fond of luxury,
and always ready to assail his literary rivals. His writings
include numerous letters (last ed. by Legrand, Paris, 1892),
speeches (Paris, 1515), and satires (Venice, 1502); besides many
scattered pieces in prose, published under the title "Convivia
Mediolanensia", and a great many Latin translations from the
Greek. In both these languages he wrote with equal fluency.
SYMONDS, Renaissance in Italy (New York, 1900), II: The Revival
of Learning; ROSMINI, Vita di Fr. Filelfo (3 vols., Milan,
1808); VOIGT, Die Wiederbelebung des classischen Alterthums
(Berlin, 1893), I; SANDYS, History of Classified Scholarship,
(Cambridge, 1908), I, 55-57.
EDMUND BURKE
Filial Church
Filial Church
(Latin filialis, from filia, daughter), a church to which is
annexed the cure of souls, but which remains dependent on
another church. As this dependence on the mother church may be
of various degrees, the term filial church may have naturally
more than one signification as to minor details. Ordinarily, a
filial church is a parish church which has been constituted by
the dismemberment of an older parish. Its rector is really a
parish priest, having all the essential rights of such a
dignity, but still bound to defer in certain accidental matters
to the pastor of the mother church. The marks of deference
required are not so fixed that local custom may not change them.
Such marks are: obtaining the baptismal water from the mother
church, making a moderate offering of money (fixed by the
bishop) to the parish priest of the mother church annually, and
occasionally during the year assisting with his parishioners in
a body at services in the older church. In some places this last
includes a procession and the presentation of a wax candle. If
the filial church has been endowed from the revenues of the
mother church, the parish priest of the latter has the right of
presentation when a pastor for the dependent church is to be
appointed.
This term is also applied to churches established within the
limits of an extensive parish, without any dismemberment of the
parochial territory. The Pastor of such a filial church is
really only a curate or assistant of the parish priest of the
mother church, and he is removable at will, except in cases
where he has a benefice. The parish priest may retain to himself
the right of performing baptism, assisting at marriages and
similar offices in the filial church, or he may ordain that such
functions be performed only in the parish church, restricting
the services in the filial church to Mass and Vespers. In
practice, however, the curates of such filial churches act as
parish priests for their districts, although by canon law the
dependence upon the pastor of the mother church remains of
obligation, though all outward manifestation of subjection has
ceased.
In the union of two parishes in the manner called "union by
subjection", the less important of the parish churches may sink
into a condition scarcely distinguisable from that of a filial
church and be comprehended under this term. In other words, the
parish priest may govern such a church by giving it over to one
of his assistants. It is true that the subjected church does not
lose its parochial rights, yet its dependence on the parish
priest of another church and its administration by a vicar has
led to its being included loosely under the designation filial
church. Historically, this term has also been applied to those
churches, often in different countries, founded by other and
greater churches. In this sense the great patriarchical Sees of
Rome, Antioch, Jerusalem, Alexandria, Constantinople established
many filial churches which retained a special dependence upon
the church founding them. The term Mother Church, however, as
applied to Rome, has a special significance as indicating its
headship of all churches.
WILLIAM H. W. FANNING
Vincenzo Da Filicaja
Vincenzo da Filicaja
Lyric poet; born at Florence, 30 December, 1642; died there 24
September, 1707. At Pisa he was trained for the legal
profession, which he later pursued, but during his academic
career he devoted no little attention to philosophy, literature,
and music. Returning to Florence, he was made a member of the
Accademia della Crusca and of the Arcadia, and enjoined the
patronage of the illustrious convert to the Catholic faith,
Christina, ex-Queen of Sweden, who with her purse helped to
lighten his family burdens. A lawyer and magistrate of
integrity, he never attained wealth. His probity and ability,
however, were acknowledged by those in power, and he was
appointed to several public offices of great trust. Thus,
already a senator by the nomination of Grand Duke Cosmo III, he
was chosen governor of Volterra in 1696, and of Pisa in 1700,
and then was given the important post of Segretario delle Tratte
at Florence. An ardent Catholic, he not infrequently gives
expression to his religious feeling in his lyrics, which, even
though they may not entitle him to rank among the greatest of
Italian poets, will always attract attention because of their
relative freedom from the literay vices of the time, the
bombast, the exaggerations and obscurity of Marinism. Notable
among his compositions are the odes or canzoni, which deal with
the raising of the siege of Vienna by John Sobieski, when in
1683 it was beleaguered by the Turks, and the sonnets in which
he bewails the woes of Italy whose beauty had made her the
object of foreign cupidity and whose sons were incapable of
fighting for her and could only enlist mercenaries to defend
her. The most famous of the sonnets is perhaps the "Italia,
Italia, O tu cui feo la sorte", which Byron rendered with skill
in the fourth canto of Chide Harold. Some letters, elogi,
orazioni, and Latin carmina, constitute the rest of his literary
output. After the death of Filicaja, an edition of the "Poesie
toscane", containing the lyrics, was given to the world by his
son (Florence, 1707); a better edition is that of Florence,
1823; selected poems are given in "Lirici del secolo XVII",
published by Sonzogno.
J.D.M. FORD
Filioque
Filioque
Filioque is a theological formula of great dogmatic and
historical importance. On the one hand, it expresses the
Procession of the Holy Ghost from both Father and Son as one
Principle; on the other, it was the occasion of the Greek
schism. Both aspects of the expression need further explanation.
I. DOGMATIC MEANING OF FILIOQUE
The dogma of the double Procession of the Holy Ghost from Father
and Son as one Principle is directly opposed to the error that
the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father, not from the Son.
Neither dogma nor error created much difficulty during the
course of the first four centuries. Macedonius and his
followers, the so-called Pneumatomachi, were condemned by the
local Council of Alexandria (362) and by Pope St. Damasus (378)
for teaching that the Holy Ghost derives His origin from the Son
alone, by creation. If the creed used by the Nestorians, which
was composed probably by Theodore of Mopsuestia, and the
expressions of Theodoret directed against the ninth anathema by
Cyril of Alexandria, deny that the Holy Ghost derives His
existence from or through the Son, they probably intend to deny
only the creation of the Holy Ghost by or through the Son,
inculcating at the same time His Procession from both Father and
Son. At any rate, the double Procession of Holy Ghost was
discussed at all in those earlier times, the controversy was
restricted to the East and was of short duration. The first
undoubted denial of the double Procession of the Holy Ghost we
find in the seventh century among the heretics of Constantinople
when St. Martin I (649-655), in his synodal writing against the
Monothelites, employed the expression "Filioque". Nothing is
known about the further development of this controversy; it
doesnot seem to have assumed any serious proportions, as the
question was not connected with the characteristic teaching of
the Monothelites. In the Western church the first controversy
concerning the double Procession of the Holy Ghost was conducted
with the envoys of the Emperor Constantine Copronymus, in the
Synod of Gentilly near Paris, held in the time of Pepin (767).
The synodal Acts and other information do not seem to exist. At
the beginning of nineth century, John, a Greek monk of the
monastery of St. Sabas, charged the monks of Mt. Olivet with
heresy, they had inserted the Filioque into the Creed. In the
second half the same century, Photius the successor of the
unjustly deposed Ignatius, Patriarch of Constatinople (858),
denied the Procession of Holy Ghost from the Son, and opposed
the insertion of the Filioque into the Constantinopolitan creed.
The same position was maintained towards the end of the tenth
century by the Patriarchs Sisinnius and Sergius, and about the
middle of the eleventh century by the Patriarch Michael
Caerularius, who renewed and completed the Greek schism. The
rejection of the Filioque, or the double Procession of the Holy
Ghost from the Father and Son, and the denial of the primacy of
the Roman Pontiff constitute even to-day the principal errors of
the Greek church. While outside the Church doubt as to the
double Procession of the Holy Ghost grew into open denial,
inside the Church the doctrine of the Filioque was declared to
be a dogma of faith in the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), the
Second Council of Lyons (1274), and the Council of Florence
(1438-1445). Thus the Church proposed in a clear and
authoritative form the teaching of Sacred Scripture and
tradition on the Procession of the Third Person of the Holy
Trinity.
As to the Sacred scripture, the inspired writers call the holy
Ghost the Spirit of the Son (Gal., iv, 6), the spirit of Christ
(Rom., viii, 9), the Spirit of Jesus Christ (Phil., i, 19), just
as they call Him the Spirit of the Father (Matt., x, 20) and the
Spirit of God (I Cor., ii, ll). Hence they attribute to the Holy
Ghost the same relation to the Son as to the Father. Again,
according to Sacred Scripture, the Son sends the Holy Ghost
(Luke, xxiv, 49; John, xv, 26; xvi, 7; xx, 22; Acts, ii, 33,;
Tit., iii.6), just as the Father sends the Son (Rom., iii. 3;
etc.), and as the Father sends the Holy Ghost (John, xiv, 26).
Now the "mission" or "sending" of one Divine Person by another
does not mean merely that the Person said to be sent assumes a
particular character, at the suggestion of Himself in the
character of Sender, as the Sabellians maintained; nor does it
imply any inferiority in the Person sent, as the Arians taught;
but it denotes, according to the teaching of the weightier
theologians and Fathers, the Procession of the Person sent from
the Person Who sends. Sacred Scripture never presents the Father
as being sent by the Son, nor the Son as being sent by the Holy
Ghost. The very idea of the term "mission" implies that the
person sent goes forth for a certain purpose by the power of the
sender, a power exerted on the person sent by way of a physical
impulse, or of a command, or of prayer, or finally of
production; now, Procession, the analogy of production, is the
only manner admissible in God. It follows that the inspired
writers present the Holy Ghost as proceeding from the Son, since
they present Him as sent by the Son. Finally, St. John (XVI,
13-15) gives the words of Christ: "What things soever he [the
Spirit] shall hear, he shall speak; ...he shall receive of mine,
and shew it to you. All things whatsoever the Father hath, are
mine." Here a double consideration is in place. First, the Son
has all things that the Father hath, so that He must resemble
the Father in being the Principle from which the Holy Ghost
proceeds. Secondly, the Holy Ghost shall receive "of mine"
according to the words of the Son; but Procession is the only
conceivable way of receiving which does not imply dependence or
inferiority. In other words, the Holy Ghost proceeds from the
Son.
The teaching of Sacred Scripture on the double Procession of the
Holy Ghost was faithfully preserved in Christian tradition. Even
the Greek Orthodox grant that the Latin Fathers maintain the
Procession of the Holy Ghost from the son. The great work on the
Trinity by Petavius (Lib. VII, cc. iii sqq.) develops the proof
of this contention at length. Here we mention only some of the
later documents in which the patristic doctrine has been clearly
expresssed: the dogmatic letter of St. Leo I to Turribius,
Bishop of Astorga, Ep. XV, c. i (447); the so-called Athanasian
Creed; several councils held at Toledo in the years 447, 589
(III), 675 (XI), 693 (XVI); the letter of Pope Hormisdas to the
Emperor Justius, Ep. lxxix (521); St. Martin I's synodal
utterance against the Monothelites, 649-655; Pope Adrian I's
answer to the Caroline Books, 772-795; The Synods of Merida
(666), Braga (675), and Hatfield (680); the writing of Pope Leo
III (d. 816) to the monks of Jerusalem; the letter of Pope
Stephen V (d. 891) to the Moravian King Suentopolcus
(Suatopluk), Ep. xiii; the symbol of Pope Leo IX (d. 1054); the
Fourth Lateran Council, 1215; the Second Council of Lyons, 1274;
and the council of Florence, 1439. Some of the foregoing
conciliar documents may be seen in Hefele, "Conciliengeschichte"
(2d ed.), III, nn. 109, 117, 252, 411; cf. P.G. XXVIII, 1557
sqq. Bessarion, speaking in the Council of Florence, inferred
the tradition of the Greek Church from the teaching of the
Latin; since the Greek and Latin Fathers before the nineth
century were the members of the same Church, it is antecedently
improbable that the Eastern Fathers should have denied a dogma
firmly maintained by the Western. Moreover, there are certain
considerations which form a direct proof for the belief of the
Greek Fathers in the double Procession of the Holy Ghost.
+ First, the Greek Fathers enumerate the Divine Persons in the
same order as the Latin Fathers; they admit that the Son and
the Holy Ghost are logically and ontologically connected in
the same way as the son and Father [St. Basil, Ep. cxxv; Ep.
xxxviii (alias xliii) ad Gregor. fratrem; "Adv.Eunom.", I, xx,
III, sub init.]
+ Second, the Greek Fathers establish the same relation between
the Son and the Holy ghost as between the Father and the Son;
as the Father is the fountain of the Son, so is the Son the
fountain of the Holy Ghost (Athan., Ep. ad Serap. I, xix,
sqq.; "De Incarn.", ix; Orat. iii, adv. Arian., 24; Basil,
"Adv. Eunom.", v, in P.G.., XXIX, 731; cf. Greg. Naz., Orat.
xliii, 9).
+ Third, passages are not wanting in the writings of the Greek
Fathers in which the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son
is clearly maintained: Greg. Thaumat., "Expos. fidei sec.",
vers. saec. IV, in Rufius, Hist. Eccl., VII, xxv; Epiphan.,
Haer., c. lxii, 4; Greg. Nyss. Hom. iii in orat. domin.);
Cyril of Alexandria, "Thes.", ass. xxxiv; the second canon of
synod of forty bishops held in 410 at Seleucia in Mesopotamia;
the Arabic versions of the Canons of St. Hippolytus; the
Nestorian explanation of the Symbol.
The only Scriptural difficulty deserving our attention is based
on the words of Christ as recorded in John, xv, 26, that the
Spirit proceeds from the Father, without mention being made of
the Son. But in the first place, it can not be shown that this
omission amounts to a denial; in the second place, the omission
is only apparent, as in the earlier part of the verse the Son
promises to "send" the Spirit. The Procession of the Holy Ghost
from the Son is not mentioned in the Creed of Constantinople,
because this Creed was directed against the Macedonian error
against which it sufficed to declare the Procession of the Holy
Ghost from the Father. The ambiguous expressions found in some
of the early writers of authority are explained by the
principles which apply to the language of the early Fathers
generally.
II. HISTORICAL IMPORTANCE OF THE FILIOQUE
It has been seen that the Creed of Constantinople at first
declared only the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father;
it was directed against the followers of Macedonius who denied
the Procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father. In the East,
the omission of Filioque did not lead to any misunderstanding.
But conditions were different in Spain after the Goths had
renounced Arianism and professed the Catholic faith in the Third
Synod of Toledo, 589. It cannot be acertained who first added
the Filioque to the Creed; but it appears to be certain that the
Creed, with the addition of the Filioque, was first sung in the
Spanish Church after the conversion of the Goths. In 796 the
Patriarch of Aquileia justified and adopted the same addition at
the Synod of Friaul, and in 809 the Council of Aachen appears to
have approved of it. The decrees of this last council were
examined by Pope Leo III, who approved of the doctrine conveyed
by the Filioque, but gave the advice to omit the expression in
the Creed. The practice of adding the Filioque was retained in
spite of the papel advice, and in the middle of the eleventh
century it had gained a firm foothold in Rome itself. scholars
do not agree as to the exact time of its introduction into Rome,
but most assign it to the reign of Benedict VIII (1014-15). The
Catholic doctrine was accepted by the Greek deputies who were
present at the Second Council of florence, in 1439, when the
Creed was sung both in greek and Latin, with the addition of the
word Filioque. On each occasion it was hoped that the Patriarch
of Constantinople and his subjects had abandoned the state of
heresy and schism in which they had been living since time of
Photius, who about 870 found in the Filioque an excuse for
throwing off all dependence on Rome. But however sincere the
individual Greek bishops may have been, they failed to carry
their people with them, and the breach between East and West
continues to this day. It is a matter for surprise that so
abstract a subject as the doctrine of the double Procession of
the Holy Ghost should have appealed to the imagination of the
multitude. But their national feelings had been aroused by the
desire of liberation from the rule of the ancient rival of
Constantinople; the occasion of lawfully obtaining their desire
appeared to present itself in the addition of Filioque to the
Creed of Constantinople. Had not Rome overstepped her rights by
disobeying the injunction of the Third Council, of Ephesus
(431), and of the Fourth, of Chalcedon (451)? It is true that
these councils had forbidden to introduce another faith or
another Creed, and had imposed the penalty of deposition on
bishops and clerics, and of excommunication on monks and laymen
for transgressing this law; but the councils had not forbidden
to explain the same faith or to propose the same Creed in a
clearer way. Besides, the conciliar decrees affected individual
transgressors, as is plain from the sanction added; they did not
bind the Church as a body. Finally, the Councils of Lyons and
Florence did not require the Greeks to insert the Filioque into
the Creed, but only to accept the Catholic doctrine of the
double Procession of the Holy Ghost. (See HOLY GHOST and CREED.)
A. J. MAAS
Guillaume Fillastre (Philastrius)
Guillaume Fillastre (Philastrius)
French cardinal, canonist, humanist, and geographer, b. 1348 at
La Suze, Maine, France; d. at Rome, 6 November, 1428. After
graduating as doctor juris utriusque, Fillastre taught
jurisprudence at Reims, and in 1392 was appointed dean of its
metropolitan chapter. During the Western Schism he showed at
first much sympathy for Benedict XIII (Peter de Luna). In 1409,
however, he took part in the attempt to reconcile the factions
at the Council of Pisa. John XXIII conferred on him and his
friend d'Ailly the dignity of cardinal (1411), and in 1413 he
was made Archbishop of Aix. Fillastre took a very important part
in the Council of Constance, where he and Cardinal d'Ailly were
the first to agitate the question of the abdication of the rival
claimants (February, 1415). He won special distinction through
the many legal questions on which he gave decisions. Martin V,
in whose election he had been an important factor, appointed him
legatus a latere to France (1418), where he was to promote the
cause of Church unity. In recognition of his successful efforts
in this capacity, he was made Archpriest of the Lateran
Basilica. In 1421 he resigned the See of Aix, and in 1422 was
assigned to the See of Saint-Pons-de-Thomieres. He died at Rome
in his eightieth year, as Cardinal-Priest of San Marco.
During the Council of Constance Fillastre kept a diary
discovered by Heinrich Finke, first reviewed by him in the
"Roemische Quartalschrift" (1887), and there partly edited by
him. It is the most important historical source for the Council
of Constance, and was edited by Finke in its entirety in 1889
(in his "Forschungen und Quellen", see below, 163-242).
Fillastre's notes throw new light on the principal participants
in the council, as well as on the two popes who were deposed and
their trial, on the college of cardinals as a body, and in
particular on Cardinals d'Ailly, Fillastre, Zabarella, etc.
Fillastre is our only authority concerning the preliminary
motions on the method of voting and the extremely difficult
position of the college of Cardinals; he gives us our first
clear conception of the quarrels that arose among the "nations"
over the matter of precedence, and the place which the Spanish
"nation" held at the council; he also furnishes the long-sought
explanation of the confirmation of Sigismund as Holy Roman
Emperor by Martin V. Fillastre's diary derives its highest
value, however, from the exposition of the relations between the
king and the council and the description of the conclave.
While Fillastre was in Constance (where, it may be remarked, he
translated several of Plato's works into Latin), he rendered
important services to the history of geography and cartography,
as well as to the history of the council. Thus he had copied the
Latin translation of Ptolemy's geography (without maps), which
had been completed by Jacobus Angelus in 1409, a manuscript he
had great difficulty in securing from Florence. Together with
this precious Ptolemy codex, he sent in 1418 to the
chapter-library of Reims, which he had founded and already
endowed with many valuable manuscripts, a large map of the world
traced on walrus skin, and a codex of Pomponius Mela. The two
geographical codices are still preserved as precious "cimelia"
in the municipal library of Reims, but the map of the world
unfortunately disappeared during the eighteenth century.
About 1425 Fillastre wrote one of his most important canonical
works on interest and usury; it has been handed down in numerous
manuscripts. In 1427, though now an old man, he was as
indefatigible as ever, and had the maps of Ptolemy drawn from a
Greek original, but on a diminished scale, and arranged with
Latin terminology, to go with his Latin Ptolemy. Since Ptolemy
had no knowledge of the Scandinavian Peninsula, much less of
Greenland, Fillastre completed his codex by adding to Ptolemy's
ten maps of Europe an eleventh. This "eleventh map of Europe",
with the subjoined detailed description of Denmark, Sweden,
Norway, and Greenland, is the only existing copy of the "first
map" of Claudius Clavus, "the first cartographer of America".
This precious cartographic treasure is still preserved in the
municipal library of Nancy.
Marlot, Metropolis remensis historia (Reims, 1679), II,
693 sqq.; AlbanEs, Gallia Christ. (novissima) (1899), I, 96
sqq.; Finke, Forschungen und Quellen zur Geschichte des
Konstanzer Konzils (Paderborn, 1889), 73 sqq.; Storm, Den danske
geogr. Claudius Clavus (Stockholm, 1891), 129 sqq.; Fischer,
Discoveries of the Norsemen (London, 1903), 58 sqq., 83 sqq.;
BjOernbo and Petersen, Claudius Clavus (Innsbruck, 1908).
Joseph Fischer
Vincenzo Filliucci
Vincenzo Filliucci
Jesuit moralist; b. at Sienna, Italy, 1566; d. at Rome 5 April,
1622. Having entered the Society of Jesus at the age of eighteen
and made the usual course in classics, science, philosophy, and
theology, he professed philosophy and mathematics for some
years, and later became rector of the Jesuit college in his
native city. Being summoned to Rome to fill the chair in moral
theology in the Roman College, he taught there for ten years
with great distinction. Paul V appointed him penitentiary of St.
Peter's, a post he filled until his death in the following
pontificate. Fillucci's greatest work, "Moralium Quaestionem de
Christianis Officiis et Causibus Conscientiae Tomi Duo",
appeared in 1622, together with a posthumous "Appendix, de Statu
Clericorum", forming a third volume, has frequently been
reprinted in several counties of Europe. A "Synopsis Theologiae
Moralis", which likewise appeared posthumously in 1626, went
through numerous editions. Fillucci is also known for his
excellent "Brevis Instructio pro Confessionibus Excipiendis"
(Ravensburg, 1626); this work is generally published as an
appendix in all subsequent editions of his "Synopsis." Besides
these published works, there is a manuscript, "Tractis de
Censuris", preserved in the archives of the Roman College. As an
authority in moral theology, Fr. Fillucci has ever been accorded
high rank, though this did not save him from the attacks of the
Jansenists. The "Provincial Letters" of Pascal, and "Les
Extraits des Assertions" makes much capital out of their garbled
quotations from his writings; while, in the anti-Jesuit tumult
of 1762, the "parlement" of Bordeaux forbade his works, and the
"parlement" of Rouen burnt them, together with twenty-eight
other works by Jesuit authors.
Sommervogel, Bibl. de la C. de J., III, 735; IX, 340; de Backer,
Bibl des Ecrevains de la Comp. de Jesu, I, 308; Hurter,
Nomenclator Literarius, I, 364.
JOHN F.X. MURPHY
Felix Filliucius
Felix Filliucius
(Or, as his name is more often found, in its Italian form,
FIGLIUCCI).
An Italian humanist, a philosopher, and theologian of note, was
b. at Siena about the year 1525; supposed to have d. at Florence
c. 1590. He completed his studies in philosophy at Padua and was
for a time in the service of Cardinal Del Monte, afterwards
Julius III. In spite of the fact that he gained a great
reputation as an orator and poet, and had a wide knowledge of
Greek, no mention of his name is found in such standard works on
the Renaissance as Burchardt, Voigt (Die Wiederbelebung des
class. Alterthums), and Belloni (Il Seicento). After having
enjoyed the pleasures of the worldly life at the court in 1551
he entered the Dominican convent at Florence, where he assumed
the name Alexus. His works are both original in Italian and
translations into that language from the Greek. Worthy of
mention are: "Il Fedro, ovvero del bello" (Rome, 1544); "Delle
divine lettere del gran Marsilio Ficino" (Venice, 1548); "Le
undici Filippiche di Demostene dichiarate" (Rome, 1550); "Della
Filosofia morale d'Aristotile" (Rome, 1551); "Della Politica,
ovvero Scienza civile secondo la dottrina d'Aristotile, libri
VIII scritti in modo di dialogo" (Venice, 1583). Filliucius
attended the Council of Trent, where he delivered a remarkable
Latin oration and, at the order of St. Pius V, translated into
Italian, under his cloister name of Alexus, the Latin Catechism
of the Council of Trent (Catechismo, cioe istruzione secondo il
decreto del concilio di Trento, Rome, 1567), often reprinted.
JOSEPH DUNN
St. Finan
St. Finan
Second Bishop of Lindisfarne; died 9 February, 661. He was an
Irish monk who had been trained in Iona, and who was specially
chosen by the Columban monks to succeed the great St. Aidan
(635-51). St. Bede describes him as an able ruler, and tells of
his labours in the conversion of Northumbria. He built a
cathedral "in the Irish fashion", employing "hewn oak, with an
outer covering of reeds", dedicated to St. Peter. His apostolic
zeal resulted in the foundation of St. Mary's at the mouth of
the River Tyne; Gilling, a monastery on the sight where King
Oswin had been murdered, founded by Queen Eanfled, and the great
abbey of Streanaeshalch, or Whitby. St. Finan (Finn-an -- little
Finn) converted Peada, son of Penda, King of the Middle Angles,
"with all his Nobles and Thanes", and gave him four priests,
including Diuma, whom he consecrated Bishop of Middle Angles and
Mercia, under King Oswy. The breviary of Aberdeen styles him "a
man of venerable life, a bishop of great sanctity, an eloquent
teacher of unbelieving races, remarkable for his training in
virtue and his liberal education, surpassing all his equals in
every manner of knowledge as well as in circumspection and
prudence, but chiefly devoting himself to good works and
presenting in his life, a most apt example of virtue".
In the mysterious ways of Providence, the Abbey of Whitby, his
chief foundation, was the scene of the famous Paschal
controversy, which resulted in the withdrawal of the Irish monks
from Lindisfarne. The inconvenience of the two systems -- Irish
and Roman -- of keeping Easter was specially felt when on one
occasion King Oswy and his Court were celebrating Easter Sunday
with St. Finan, while on the same day Queen Eanfled and her
attendants were still fasting and celebrating Palm Sunday. Saint
Finan was spared being present at the Synod of Whitby. His feast
is celebrated on the 9th of February.
W.H. GRATTAN-FLOOD
St. Finbarr
St. Finbarr
(Lochan, Barr).
Bishop and patron of Cork, born near Bandon, about 550, died at
Cloyne, 25 September, 623, was son of Amergin. He evangelized
Gowran, Coolcashin, and Aghaboe, and founded a school at Eirce.
For some years he dwelt in a hermitage at Gougane Barra, where a
beautiful replica of Cormac's chapel has recently been erected
in his honour. Finbarr was buried in the cathedral he built
where Cork city now stands. He was specially honoured also at
Dornoch and Barra, in Scotland. There are five Irish saints of
this name. (See CORK.)
Life by Walsh (New York, 1864); Banba (Dublin), 207.
A.A. MACERLEAN
Ven. John Finch
Ven. John Finch
A martyr, b. about 1548; d. 20 April, 1584. He was a yeoman of
Eccleston, Lancashire, and a member of a well-known old Catholic
family, but he appears to have been brought up in schism. When
he was twenty years old he went to London where he spent nearly
a year with some cousins at Inner Temple. While there he was
forcibly struck by the contrast between Protestantism and
Catholicism in practice and determined to lead a Catholic life.
Failing to find advancement in London he returned to Lancashire
where he was reconciled to Catholic Church. He then married and
settled down, his house becoming a centre of missionary work, he
himself harbouring priests and aiding them in every way, besides
acting as catechist. His zeal drew on him the hostility of the
authorities, and at Christmas, 1581, he was entrapped into
bringing a priest, George Ostliffe, to a place where both were
apprehended. It was given out that Finch, having betrayed the
priest and other Catholics, had taken refuge with the Earl of
Derby, but in fact, he was kept in the earl's house as a
prisoner, sometimes tortured and sometimes bribed in order to
pervert him and induce him to give information. This failing, he
was removed to the Fleet prison at Manchester and afterwards to
the House of Correction. When he refused to go to the Protestant
church he was dragged there by the feet, his head beating on the
stones. For many months he lay in a damp dungeon, ill-fed and
ill-treated, desiring always that he might be brought to trial
and martyrdom. After three years' imprisonment, he was sent to
be tried at Lancaster. There he was brought to trial with three
priests on 18 April, 1584. He was found guilty and, 20 April,
having spent the night in converting some condemned felons, he
suffered with Ven. James Bell at Lancaster. The cause of his
beatification with those of the other English Martyrs was
introduced by decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, 4
Dec., 1886.
EDWIN BURTON
Ven. John Finglow
Ven. John Finglow
An English martyr; b. at Barnby, near Howden, Yorkshire;
executed at York, 8 August, 1586. He was ordained priest at the
English College, Reims, 25 March, 1581, whence the following
month he was sent on the English mission. After labouring for
some time in the north of England, he was seized and confined in
Ousebridge Kidcote, York, where for a time he endured serious
discomforts, alleviated slightly by a fellow-prisoner. He was
finally tried for being a Catholic priest and reconciling
English subjects to the ancient Faith, and condemned to be
hanged, drawn, and quartered.
F.M. RUDGE
Finland
Grand Duchy of Finland
A department or province of the Russian Empire; bounded on the
north by Norway, on the west by Sweden and the Gulf of Bothnia,
on the south by the Gulf of Finland. Its limits extend from
about 60DEG to 70DEG N. lat., and from about 19DEG to 33DEG E.
long.; the area is 141,617 sq. miles. Finland abounds in lakes
and forests, buit the proportion of arable soil is small. The
population numbers 2,900,000 souls, chiefly Finns; the coasts
are inhabited by the descendants of Swedish settlers.
Up to the beginning of the twelfth century the people were
pagans, about this date efforts for the conversion of the Finns
were made from two sides. The Grand Duke of Novgorod,
Vassievolodovich, sent Russian missionaries to the Karelians,
Finns living on the Lake of Ladoga in east Finland, While in
1157 King Erik of Sweden undertook a crusade to Finland. Erik
established himself firmly on the south-western coast and from
this base extended his power. Henrik, Bishop of Upsala, who had
accompanied Erik on this expedition, devoted himself to
preaching the Gospel and suffered the death of a martyr in 1158.
His successor, Rodulfus, met the same fate about 1178, while the
next following bishop, Folkvin, died a natural death. Finland
attained an independent church organization under Bishop Thomas
(1220; d. 1248), whose see was Raentemaekai; at a later date the
episcopal residence was transferred to AAbo. The successors of
Thomas were: Bero I (d. 1258); Ragvald I (1258-66); Kettil
(1266-86); Joannes I (1286-90); Magnus I (1290-1308), who was
the first Finn to become bishop; he transferred the see to AAbo;
Ragvald II (1309-21); Bengt (1321-38); Hemming (1338- 66), who
made wise laws, built numerous churches, began the collection of
a library, and died in the odour of sanctity; in 1514 his bones
were taken up, the relics now being in the museum of the city of
AAbo, but he was not canonized; Henricus Hartmanni (1366-68);
Joannes II Petri (1368-70); Joannes III Westfal (1370-85), a
bishop of German descent; Bero II (1385- 1412); Magnus II Olai
Tavast (1412-50), the most important prince of the Church of
Finland, who, when eighty-eight years old, undertook arduous
visitations; he also went on a pilgrimage to the Holy Land
whence he brought back objects of art and manuscripts; Olaus
Magni (1450-60), who in earlier years was twice rector of the
Sorbonne, a college of the University of Paris, and was also
procurator and bursar of the "English nation" at the university.
As representative of these he settled the disagreement between
Charles VII and the university arising from the part the latter
had taken in the burning of Joan of Arc; Conrad I Bitz
(1460-89), who in 1488 had the "Missale ecclesiae AAboensis"
printed; Magnus III Stjernkors (1489-1500); Laurentius Suurpaeae
(1500-06); Joannes IV Olavi (1506-10); Arvid Kurck (1510-20),
who was drowned in the Baltic; Ericus Svenonis (1523), the
chancellor of King Gustavus Vasa; this prelate resigned the see
as his election was not confirmed by Rome. He was the last
Catholic Bishop of Finland. The king now, on his own authority,
appointed his favourite, the Dominican Martin Skytte, as bishop;
Skytte did all in his power to promote the violent introduction
of Lutheranism. The people were deceived by the retention of
Catholic ceremonies; clerics and monks were given the choice of
apostasy, expulsion, or death. The only moderation shown was
that exhibited towards the Brigittine nunnery of Nidendal. But
on the other hand, the Dominicans at AAbo and Viborg, and the
Franciscans at Koekars were rudely driven out and apparently the
inmates of the monastery of Raumo were hung. Then, as later, the
Church of Finland did not lack martyrs, among them being Joens
Jussoila, Peter Ericius, and others.
By the end of the sixteenth century the Catholic Church of
Finland may be said to have ceased to exist. In its place
appeared an inflexible and inquisitorial Lutheranism. When in
1617 Karelia (East Finland) fell to Sweden, an effort was made
to win the native population, which belonged to the Greek
Orthodox Church, for the "pure Gospel". As this did not succeed,
the war of 1566-68 was used for the massacre and expulsion of
the people. In consequence of the victories of Peter the Great
matters after a while took another course; in 1809 Russia became
the ruler of Finland and the Orthodox Greek Church has of late
grown in strength. It numbers now 50,000 members under an
archbishop; it has fine church buildings, especially in
Helsingfors, wealthy monasteries (Valaam and Konevetz), a church
paper published at Viborg, and numerous schools. Under Russian
sovereignty the long repressed Catholic Church received again
(1869 and 1889) the right to exist, but it is still very weak,
and numbers only about 1000 souls; there are Catholic churches
at AAbo and Helsingfors. The great majority of the inhabitants
belong now, as before, to the various sects of Protestantism.
The State Church of former times, now the "National" Church, to
which the larger part of the population adhere, is divided into
four dioceses: AAbo, Kuopio, Borgaa, and Nyslott; these contain
altogether 45 provostships and 512 parishes. The finest of its
church buildings are the domed church of St. Nicholas at
Helsingfors and the church at AAbo, formerly the Catholic
cathedral. Education is provided for by a university and
technical high school at Helsingfors, by lyceums of the rank of
gymnasia, modern scientific schools, and primary schools.
Finland has a rich literature both in Swedish and Finnish.
Besides the followers of Christianity there are both Jews and
Mohammedans in Finland, but they have no civil rights. Since the
middle of the nineteenth century about 200,000 Finns have
emigrated to the United States, settling largely in Minnesota
and Michigan. The town of Hancock, Michigan, is the centre of
their religious and educational work.
Windy, Finland as It Is (New York, 1902); Nordisk Familjebok,
VIII, Pts. III-IV; Sveriges historia (Stockholm, 1877-81), VI;
Phipps, The Grand Duchy of Finland (London, 1903); Schybergoon,
Finlands historia (1903), II; Styffe, Skandinavien under
unionstiden (Stockholm, 1880); Leinberg, Det odelade Finska
Biskopsstiftets Herdamine (Jyaefskylae, 1894); Idem, De Finska
Klostrens historia (Helsingfors, 1890); Idem, Skolstaten
inuvarande AAbostift (Jyvaeskylae, 1893); Idem, Finska
studerande vid utrikes universiteter foere 1640 (Helsingfors,
1896); Idem, Om Finska studerande i Jesuitkollegier
(Helsingfors, 1890); Retzius, Finlandi i Nordiska Museet
(Stockholm, 1881); Allgemeine Weltgefruehesten Zeiten bis zur
Gegenwart (Leipzig, 1873); Schweitzer, Geschichte der
skandinavischen Litteratur (Leipzig, 1885), III; Neher in
Kirchenlex., s. v. Finnland; Konversationslex., s. v. Finland;
Baumgartner, Nordische Fahrten, II; Lavisse and Rambaud,
Histoire generale (Paris, 1893-1901), XII; Galitzin, La Finlande
(Paris, 1852), II; Brockhaus and Ephron, Konversationslexikon;
Statesman's Year Book (London, 1908), 1462-66).
P. Witmann
St. Finnian of Moville
St. Finnian of Moville
Born about 495; died 589. Though not so celebrated as his
namesake of Clonard, he was the founder of a famous school about
the year 540. He studied under St. Colman of Dromore and St.
Mochae of Noendrum (Mahee Island), and subsequently at Candida
Casa (Whithern), whence he proceeded to Rome, returning to
Ireland in 540 with an integral copy of St. Jerome's Vulgate.
St. Finnian's most distinguished pupil at Moville (County Down)
was St. Columba, whose surreptitious copying of the Psaltery led
to a very remarkable sequel. What remains of the copy, together
with the casket that contains it, is now in the National Museum,
Dublin. It is known as the Cathach or Battler, and was wont to
be carried by the O'Donnells in battle. The inner case was made
by Cathbar O'Donnell in 1084, but the outer is
fourteenth-century work. So prized was it that family of
MacGroarty were hereditary custodians of this Cathach, and it
finally passed, in 1802, to Sir Neal O'Donnell, County Mayo. St.
Finnian of Moville wrote a rule for his monks, also a
penitential code, the canons of which were published by
Wasserschleben in 1851. His festival is observed on 10
September.
Colgan, Acta Sanct. Hib. (Louvain, 1645); O'Laverty, Down and
Connor (Dublin, 1880), II; O'Hanlon, Lives of the Irish Saints
(Dublin, s.d.); Healy, Ireland's Ancient Schools and Scholars
(Dublin, 1902); Hyde, Lit. Hist. of Ireland (Dublin, 1901).
W.H. GRATTAN-FLOOD
Joseph M. Finotti
Joseph M. Finotti
Born at Ferrara, Italy, 21 September, 1817; died at Central
City, Colorado, 10 January, 1879.
In 1833 the young Finotti was received into the Society of Jesus
in Rome, and for several years taught and studied in the
colleges of the order in Italy. He was one of the recruits whom
Fr. Ryder, in 1845, brought from Europe to labour in the
Maryland Province. After his ordination at Georgetown, D.C., Fr.
Finotti was appointed pastor of St. Mary's Church, Alexandria,
Virginia, and given charge of outlying missions in Maryland and
Virginia. In 1852 he left the Society of Jesus and went to
Boston. For many years he held the position of literary editor
of "The Pilot", while acting as pastor of Brookline and later of
Arlington, Massachusetts.
The last few years of his life he spent in the West, becoming,
in 1877, pastor of Central City, Colorado, and retaining charge
of that parish up to the time of his death.
Fr. Finotti was a great book lover, giving much time to literary
pursuits and displaying special interest in the Catholic
literary history of America. Among his literary productions are,
"Month of Mary", 1853, which reached a sale of 50,000 copies;
"Life of Blessed Paul of the Cross", 1860; "Diary of a Soldier",
1861; "The French Zouave", 1863; "Herman the Pianist", 1863;
"Works of the Rev. Arthur O'Leary"; "Life of Blessed Peter
Claver", etc. Most of these publications were translated or
edited by him.
His best-known work, never completed, is his "Bibliographica
Catholica Americana" which took years of study and care. It was
intended to be a catalogue of all the Catholic books published
in the United States, with notices of their authors, and
epitomes of their contents. The first part, which brings the
list down to 1820 inclusive, was published in 1872; the second
volume, which was to include the works of Catholic writers from
1821 to 1875, was never finished, though much of the material
for it had been industriously gathered from all available
sources.
His last literary effort, which he did not live to see
published, entitled "The Mystery of Wizard Clip" (Baltimore,
1879), is a story of preternatural occurrences at Smithfield,
West Virginia, which is partly told in the life of Father
Gilitzin.
Illustrated Catholic Family Almanac, 1880; biographical Sketch
in MS., Georgetown College archives; McGee's Weekly, Feb. 15,
1879; Ave Maria, Feb., 1879; Sommervogel, II, 747.
EDWARD P. SPILLANE
Sts. Fintan
Sts. Fintan
St. Fintan of Clonenagh
A Leinster saint, b. about 524; d. 17 February, probably 594, or
at least before 597. He studied under St. Columba of Terryglass,
and in 550 settled in the solitude of the Slieve Bloom
Mountains, near what is now Maryborough, Queen's County. His
oratory soon attracted numerous disciples, for whom he wrote a
rule, and his austerities and miracles recalled the apostolic
ages. Among his pupils was the great St. Comgall of Bangor. When
he attained his seventieth year he chose Fintan Maeldubh as his
successor in the Abbey of Clonenagh. He has been compared by the
Irish annalists to St. Benedict, and is styled "Father of the
Irish Monks".
St. Fintan (Munnu) of Taghmon
Son of Tulchan, an Ulster saint, d. at Taghmon, 636. He founded
his celebrated abbey at Taghmon (Teach Munnu) in what is now
County Wexford, in 599. He is principally known as the defender
of the Irish method of keeping Easter, and, in 630, he attended
the Synod of Magh Lene, at which he dissented from the decision
to adopt the Roman paschal method. Another synod was held
somewhat later at Magh Ailbe, when St. Fintan again upheld his
views in opposition to St. Laserian (Mo Laisre). But the views
of the University Church prevailed. His feast is observed on 21
October. The beautiful stone cross of "St. Munn" still stands in
the churchyard of the village.
W.H. GRATTAN-FLOOD
Fioretti di San Francesco d'Assisi
Fioretti di San Francesco d'Assisi
Little Flowers of Francis of Assisi, the name given to a classic
collection of popular legends about the life of St. Francis of
Assisi and his early companions as they appeared to the Italian
people at the beginning of the fourteenth century. Such a work,
as Ozanam observes, can hardly be said to have one author; it is
the product rather of gradual growth and must, as Sabatier
remarks, remain in a certain sense anonymous, because it is
national. There has been some doubt as to whether the "Fioretti"
were written in Italian in the first instance, as Sbaralea
thought, or were translated from a Latin original, as Wadding
maintained. The latter seems altogether more probable, and
modern critics generally believe that a larger Latin collection
of legends, which has come down to us under the name of the
"Actus B. Francisci et Sociorum Ejus', represents an
approximation to the text now lost of the original "Floretum",
of which the "Fioretti" is a translation. A striking difference
is noticeable between the earlier chapters of the "Fioretti",
which refer to St. Francis and his companions, and the later
ones which deal with the friars in the province of the March of
Ancina. The first half of the collection is, no doubt, merely a
new form given to traditions that go back to the early days of
the order; the other is believed to be subtantially the work of
a certain Fra Ugolino da Monte Giorgio of the noble family of
Brunfote (see Brunforte, Ugolino), who, at the time of his death
in 1348, was provincial of the Friors Minor in the March. Living
as he did a century after the death of St. Francis, Ugolino was
dependent on hearsay for much of his information; part of it he
is said to have learned from Fra Giacomo da Massa who had been
well known and esteemed by the companions of the saint, and who
had lived on terms of intimacy with Fra Leone, his confessor and
secretary. Whatever may have been the sources from which Ugolino
derived his materials, the fifty-three chapters which constitute
the Latin work in question seem to have been written before
1328. The four appendixes on the Stigmata of St. Francis, the
life of Fra Ginepro, and the life and the sayings of the Fra
Egidio, which occupy nearly one half of the printed text of the
"Fioretti", as we now have it, form no part of the original
collection and were probably added by later compilers.
Unfortunately the name of the fourteenth-century Franciscan
friar who translated into Italian fifty-three of the seventy-six
chapters found in the "Actus B. Francisci" and in translating
immortalized them as the "Fioretti", remains unknown. The
attribution of this work to Giovanni di San Lorenzo rests wholly
upon conjecture. It has been surmised that the translator was a
Florentine. However this may be, the vernacular version is
written in the most limpid Tuscan and is reckoned among the
masterpieces of Italian literature.
The "Fioretti" have been described as "the most exquite
expression of the religious life of the Middle Ages". That
perhaps which gives these legends such a peculiar charm, is what
may be called their atmosphere; they breathe all the delicious
fragrance of the early Francisan spirit. Nowhere can there be
found a more childlike faith, a livelier sense of the
supernatural, or a simpler literalness in the following Christ
than in the pages of the "Fioretti", which more than any other
work transport us to the scenes amid which St. Francis and his
first followers live, and enable us to see them as they saw
themselves.
These legends, moreover, bear precious witness to the vitality
and enthusiasm with which the memory of the life and teaching of
the Poverello was preserved, and they contain much more history,
as distinct from mere poetry, than it was customary to recognize
when Suyskens and Papini wrote. In Italy the "Fioretti" have
always enjoyed an extraordinary popularity; indeed, this liber
aureus is said to have been more widely read there than any
book, not excepting even the Bible or the Divine Comedy. Certain
it is that the "Fioretti" have exercised an immense influence
forming in the popular conception of St. Francis and his
companions. The earliest known MS of the "Fioretti", now
preserved at Berlin, is dated 1390; the work was first printed
at Vicenza in 1476. Manzoni has collected many interesting
details about the wellnigh innumerable codices and editions of
the "Fioretti". The best edition for the general reader is
unquestionably that of Father Antonio Cesari (Verona, 1822)
which is based on the epoch-making edition of Filippo Buonarroti
(Florence, 1718). The Crusca quote from this edition which has
been often reprinted. The "Fioretti" have been translated into
nearly every European language and in our day are being much
read and studied in Northern countries. There are several
well-known English versions.
PASCHAL ROBINSON
Liturgical Use of Fire
Liturgical Use of Fire
Fire is one of the most expressive and most ancient of
liturgical symbols. All the creeds of antiquity accorded a
prominent place to this element whose mysterious nature and
irresistible power frequently caused it to be adored as a god.
The sun, as the principle of heat and light for the earth, was
regarded as an igneous mass and had its share in this worship.
Christianity adapted this usual belief, but denied the divine
title to heat and light, and made them the symbols of the
divinity, which enlightens and warms humanity. The symbolism led
quite naturally to the liturgical rite by which the Church on
the Eve of Easter celebrates the mystery of the Death and
Resurrection of Christ, of which the extinguished and rekindled
fire furnishes the expressive image. The beginning of the office
also reflects ancient beliefs. The new fire is struck from a
flint and is blessed with this prayer:
Lord God, Almighty Father, inextinguishable light, Who hast created
all light, bless this light sanctified and blessed by Thee, Who hast
enlightened the whole world; make us enlightened by that light and
inflamed with the fire of Thy brightness; and as Thou didst
enlighten Moses when he went out of Egypt, so illuminate our hearts
and senses that we may attain life and light everlasting through
Christ our Lord. Amen.
When the fire has been struck from the flint the three-branched
candle is lighted and the deacon chants the "Exultet", a
liturgical poem whose style is as lively and charming as the
melody which accompanies it. It is yet preserved in the Roman
Liturgy. In the East the ceremony of the new fire occupies a
place of considerable importance in the paschal ritual of the
Greek Church at Jerusalem. This ceremony is the occasion for
scandalous demonstrations of a piety which frequently
degenerates into orgies worthy of pagan rites. The Journal of
the Marquis de Nointel, in the seventeenth century, relates
scenes which cannot be transcribed and which take place
periodically. This ceremony is peculiar to the Holy City and
does not figure in the ordinary Byzantine ritual.
In the West we see the Irish, as early as the sixth century,
lighting large fires at nightfall on the Eve of Easter. The
correspondence of St. Boniface with Pope Zachary furnishes a
curious detail on this subject. These fires were kindled, not
with brands from other fires, but with lenses; they were
therefore new fires. There is no trace of this custom in Gaul,
where the Merovingian liturgical books are silent on the point.
It is difficult to say what took place in Spain, for although
the Mozarabic Missal contains a blessing of fire at the
beginning of the vigil of Easter, it can hardly be admitted that
this ceremony was primitive. It may have been inserted in this
missal at a later date as it was in the Roman Missal, in the
case of which fire is obtained from a flint and steel. It is
possible that the custom, of Breton or Celtic origin, was
imposed upon the Anglo-Saxons, and the missionaries of that
nation brought it to the continent in the eighth century. An
altogether different rite, though of similar meaning, was
followed at Rome. On Holy Thursday, at the consecration of the
holy chrism, there was collected in all the lamps of the Lateran
basilica a quantity of oil sufficient to fill three large vases
deposited in the corner of the church. Wicks burned in this oil
until the night of Holy Saturday, when there were lighted from
these lamps the candles and other luminaries by which, during
the Eve of Easter, light was thrown on the ceremonies of the
administration of baptism. The rite must have been attended with
a certain solemnity since the letter of Pope Zachary to St.
Boniface prescribes that a priest, perhaps even a bishop, should
officiate on this occasion. Unhappily we are reduced to this
somewhat vague information, for neither the Roman "Ordines", nor
the Sacramentaries tell us anything concerning this ceremony.
This blessing of the paschal candle and the fire at the
beginning of Easter Eve is foreign to Rome. The large lamps
prepared on Holy Thursday provided fire on the Friday and
Saturday without necessitating the solemn production of a new
fire. The feast of the Purification or Candlemas (2 February)
has a celebrated rite with ancient prayers concerning the
emission of liturgical fire and light. One of them invokes
Christ as "the true light which enlightenest every man that
cometh into this world". The canticle of Simeon, "Nunc
Demittis", is chanted with the anthem "A light (which my eyes
have seen) for the revelation of the Gentiles and for the glory
of thy people Israel."
SCHANZ. Apologia (tr.) II, 96, 101; DE LA SAUSSAYE, Comparative
Religion, II, 185; DUCHESNE, Origins of Christian Worship
(London, 1904); KELLNER, Heortology (London, 1908); HAMPSON,
Medii =AEvi Kalendarium, HONE'S Every Day Book.
H. LECLERCQ
Firmament
Firmament
(Sept. stereoma; Vulgate, firmamentum).
The notion that the sky was a vast solid dome seems to have been
common among the ancient peoples whose ideas of cosmology have
come down to us. Thus the Egyptians conceived the heavens to be
an arched iron ceiling from which the stars were suspended by
means of cables (Chabas, LAEAntiquiteAE historique, Paris, 1873,
pp. 64-67). Likewise to the mind of the Babylonians the sky was
an immense dome, forged out of the hardest metal by the hand of
Merodach (Marduk) and resting on a wall surrounding the earth
(Jensen, Die Kosmologie der Babylonier, Strasburg, 1890, pp.
253, 260). According to the notion prevalent among the Greeks
and Romans, the sky was a great vault of crystal to which the
fixed stars were attached, though by some it was held to be of
iron or brass. That the Hebrews entertained similar ideas
appears from numerous biblical passages. In the first account of
the creation (Gen., i) we read that God created a firmament to
divide the upper or celestial from the lower or terrestrial
waters. The Hebrew word means something beaten or hammered out,
and thus extended; the Vulgate rendering, ofirmamentumoe
corresponds more closely with the Greek stereoma (Septuagint,
Aquila, and Symmachus), osomething made firm or solidoe. The
notion of the solidity of the firmament is moreover expressed in
such passages as Job, xxxvii, 18, where reference is made
incidentally to the heavens, owhich are most strong, as if they
were of molten brassoe. The same is implied in the purpose
attributed to God in creating the firmament, viz. to serve as a
wall of separation between the upper and lower of water, it
being conceived as supporting a vast celestial reservoir; and
also in the account of the deluge (Gen., vii), where we read
that the oflood gates of heaven were openedoe, and shut upoe
(viii, 2). (Cf. also IV 28 sqq.) Other passages e.g. Is., xlii,
5, emphasize rather the idea of something extended: oThus saith
the Lord God that created the heavens and stretched them outoe
(Cf. Is., xliv, 24, and xl, 22). In conformity with these ideas,
the writer of Gen., i, 14-17, 20 represents God as setting the
stars in the firmament of heaven, and the fowls are located
beneath it, i.e. in the air as distinct from the firmament. On
this point as on many others, the Bible simply reflects the
current cosmological ideas and language of the time.
LeseAEtre in Vig., Dict. de la Bible, s. v.: Whitehouse in
Hastings, Dict. of the Bible. s. v. Cosmogony, I, 502.
JAMES F. DRISCOLL
Firmicus Maternus
Firmicus Maternus
Christian author of the fourth century, wrote a work "De errore
profanarum religionum". Nothing is known about him except what
can be gleaned from this work, which is found in only one MS.
(Codex Vaticano-Palatinus, Saec. X). Some references to the
Persian Wars, and the fact that the work was addressed to the
two emperors, Constantius II and Constans I, have led to the
conclusion that it was composed during their joint reign
(337-350). The work is valuable because it gives a picture of
the character which the paganism of the later Roman Empire had
taken, under the stress of the new spiritual needs aroused by
contact with the religions of Egypt and the East. It aims, if
one may judge from the mutilated introduction, at presenting
from a philosophical and historical standpoint, reasons showing
the superiority of Christianity over the superstitions and
licentiousness of heathenism. In a general survey of pagan
creeds and beliefs the author holds up to scorn the origin and
practices of the Gentile cults. All its parts are not of equal
merit or importance, from the purely historical standpoint. The
first portion, in which the religions of Greece and the East are
described, is merely a compilation from earlier sources, but in
the latter section of the work, in which the mysteries of
Eleusis, Isis, and especially Mithra are set forth in detail,
with their system of curious passwords, formulae, and
ceremonies, the author seems to speak from personal experience,
and thus reveals many interesting facts which are not found
elsewhere. The emperors are exhorted to stamp out this network
of superstition and immorality, as a sacred duty for which they
will receive a reward from God Himself, and ultimately the
praise and thanks of those whom they rescue from error and
corruption. The theory that the author of the Christian work was
identical with Julius Firmicus Maternus Siculus, who wrote a
work on astrology (De Nativitatibus sive Matheseos), assigned by
Mommsen to the year 337 ["Hermes", XXIX (1894), 468 sq.], is
favourably received by some, as well because of the identity of
names and dates, as because of similarities in style which they
are satisfied the two documents exhibit. This theory of course
supposes that the author wrote one work before, the other after,
his conversion. Critical edition by Halm (Vienna, 1867) in
"Corpus Scrip. Eccles. Lat.", II.
PATRICK J. HEALY
Firmilian
Firmilian
Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, died c. 269. He had among his
contemporaries a reputation comparable to that of Dionysius or
Cyprian. St. Gregory of Nyssa tells us that St. Gregory the
Wonder-Worker, then a pagan, having completed his secular
studies, "fell in with Firmilian, a Cappadocian of noble family,
similar to himself in character and talent, as he showed in his
subsequent life when he adorned the Church of Caesarea." The two
young men agreed in their desire to know more of God, and came
to Origen, whose disciples they became, and by whom Gregory, at
least, was baptised. Firmilian was more probably brought up as a
Christian. Later, when bishop, Eusebius tells us, he had such a
love for Origen that he invited him to his own country for the
benefit of the Churches, at the time (232-5) when the great
teacher was staying in Caesarea of Palestine, on account of his
bishop's displeasure at his having been ordained priest in that
city. Firmilian also went to him subsequently and stayed with
him some time that he might advance in theology (Hist. Eccl.,
VII, xxviii, 1). He was an opponent of the antipope Novatian,
for Dionysius in 252-3 writes that Helenus of Tarsus, Firmilian,
and Theoctistus of Caesarea in Palestine (that is, the
Metropolitans of Cilicia, Cappadocia, and Palestine) had invited
him to a synod at Antioch, where some were trying to support the
heresy of Novatian (Euseb., Hist. Eccl., VI, xlvi, 3). Dionysius
counts Firmilian as one of "the more eminent bishops" in a
letter to Pope Stephen (ibid., VII, v, 1), where his expression
"Firmilian and all Cappadocia" again implies that Caesarea was
already a metropolitan see. This explains why Firmilian could
invite Origen to Cappadocia, "for the benefit of the Churches".
In a letter to Pope Sixtus II (257-8), Dionysius mentions that
Pope St. Stephen in the baptismal controversy had refused to
communicate with Helenus of Tarsus, Firmilian, and all Cilicia
and Cappadocia, and the neighbouring lands (Euseb., VII, v,
3-4). We learn the cause of this from the only writing of St.
Firmilian's which remains to us. When the baptismal controversy
arose, St. Cyprian wished to gain support from the Churches of
the East against Pope Stephen for his own decision to rebaptize
all heretics who returned to the Church. At the end of the
summer of 256, he sent the deacon Rogatian to Firmilian with a
letter, together with the documents on the subject-letters of
the pope, of his own, and of his council at Carthage in the
spring, and the treatise "De Eccl. Cath. Unitate". Firmilian's
reply was received at Charthage about the middle of November. It
is a long letter, even more bitter and violent than that of
Cyprian to Pompeius. It has come down to us in a translation
made, no doubt, under St. Cyprian's direction, and apparently
very literal, as it abounds in Graecisms (Ep. lxxv among St.
Cyprian's letters). St. Cpyrian's arguments against St. Stephen
are reiterated and reinforced, and the treatise on Unity is laid
under contribution. It is particularly interesting to note that
the famous fourth chapter of that treatise must have been before
the writer of the letter in its original form, and not in the
alternative "Roman" form (c. xvi). It is the literal truth when
Firmilian says: "We have received your writings as our own, and
have committed them to memory by repeated reading" (c. iv)
The reasoning against the validity of heretical baptism is
mainly that of St. Cyprian, that those who are outside the
Church and have not the Holy Spirit cannot admit others to the
Church or give what they do not possess. Firmilian is fond of
dilemmas: for instance, either the heretics do not give the Holy
Ghost, in which case rebaptism is necessary, or else they do
give it, in which case Stephen should not enjoin the laying on
of hands. It is important that Firmilian enables us to gather
much of the drift of St. Stephen's letter. It is "ridiculous"
that Stephen demanded nothing but the use of the Trinitarian
formula. He had appealed to tradition from St. Peter and St.
Paul: this is an insult to the Apostles, cries Firmilian, for
they execrated heretics. Besides (this is from Cyprian, Ep.
lxxiv, 2), "no one could be so silly as to believe this", for
the heretics are all later than the Apostles! And Rome has not
preserved the Apostolic traditions unchanged, for it differs
from Jerusalem as to the observances at Easter and as to other
mysteries. "I am justly indignant with Stephen's obvious and
manifest silliness, that he so boasts of his position, and
claims that he is the successor of St. Peter on whom were laid
the foundations of the Church; yet he brings in many other
rocks, and erects new buildings of many Churches when he defends
with his authority the baptism conferred by heretics; for those
who are baptized are without doubt numbered in the Church, and
he who approves their baptism affirms that there is among them a
Church of the baptized.... Stephen, who declares that he has the
Chair of Peter by succession, is excited by no zeal against
heretics" (c. xvii). "You have cut yourself off-do not
mistake-since he is the true schismatic who makes himself an
apostate from the communion of ecclesiastical unity. For in
thinking that all can be excommunicated by you, you have cut off
yourself alone from the communion of all" (c. xxiv).
We thus learn the claims of the pope to impose on the whole
Church by his authority as successor of Peter, a custom derived
by the Roman Church from Apostolic tradition. Firmilian tells
the Africans that with them the custom of rebaptizing may be
new, but in Cappadocia it is not, and he can answer Stephen by
opposing tradition to tradition, for it was their practice from
the beginning (c. xix); and some time since, he had joined in a
council at Iconium with the bishops of Galatia and Cilicia and
other provinces, and had decided to rebaptize the Montanists (c.
vii and xix). Dionysius, in a letter to the Roman priest
Philemon, also mentions the Council of Iconium with one of
Synnada "among many". It was presumably held in the last years
of Alexander Severus, c. 231-5. Firmilian also took part in the
two councils of 264-5 at Antioch which deposed Paul of Samosata.
He may even have presided. The letter of the third council says
he was too easily persuaded that Paul would amend; hence the
necessity of another council (Euseb., Hist. Eccl., VII, iii-v).
He was on his way to this assembly when death overtook him at
Tarsus. This was in 268 (Harnack) or 269. Though he was cut off
from communion by Pope Stephen, it is certain that the following
popes did not adhere to this severe policy. He is commemorated
in the Greek Menaea on 28 Oct., but is unknown to the Western
martyrologies. His great successor, St. Basil, mentions his view
on heretical baptism without accepting it (Ep. clxxxviii), and
says, when speaking of the expression "with the Holy Ghost" in
the Doxology: "That our own Firmilian held this faith is
testified by the books [logoi] which he has left" (De. Spir.
Sanc., xxix, 74). We hear nothing else of such writings, which
were probably letters.
Bossue, in Acta SS., 28 Oct., gives an elaborate
dissertation on this saint; Benson in Dict. Christ. Biog.; the
genuineness of the letter was arbitrarily contested by
Missorius, In Epist. ad Pomp. inter Cypr. (Venice, 1733), and by
Molkenbuhr, Binae diss. de S. Firm. (Muenster, 1790, and in P.
L., III, 1357); Ritschl, Cyprian v. Karth (Goettingen, 1895),
argued that the letter had been interpolated at Carthage in the
interests of Cyprian's party; so also Harnack in Gesch. der
altchr. Lit. (Leipzig, 1893), I, 407, and Soden, Die
cyprianische Briefsammlung (Berlin, 1904); this was disproved by
Ernst, Die Echtheit des Briefes Firmilians in Zeitschr. fuer
kath. Theol. (1894), XVIII, 209, and Zur Frage ueber die Echheit
des Briefs F.'s an Cyprian (ibid., XX, 364), also by Benson,
Cyprian (London, 1897), p. 377, and Harnack later expressed
himself convinced (Gesch., II, ii, p. 359, 1904). Moses of
Chorene, Hist. Arm., II, lxxv, attributed to Firmilian "many
books, among them a history of the persecutions of the Church in
the days of Maximus, Decius and later of Diocletian". This is a
mistake. It seems there were letters from Firmilian in the
published correspondence of Origen, according to St. Jerome's
version of the list of Origen's works by Pamphilus and Eusebius:
"Origenis Firmiani [sic] et Gregorii" [ed. by Klostermann,
Sitzungsberichte der Real-Akad (Berlin, 1897); see Harnack, op.
cit., II, ii, p. 47]; the letter to Gregory Thaum. is extant. A
fragment of a letter from Origen to Firmilian, cited by Victor
of Capua, was published by Pitra, Spic. Solesm., I, 268. St.
Augustine seems not to have known the letter to Cyprian, but
Cresconius seems to have referred to it, C. Cresc., iii, 1 and
3. The letter is not quoted by any ancient writer, and is found
in at most 28 out of the 431 MSS. of St. Cyprian enumerated by
von Soden, op. cit. See also Bardenhewer, Gesch. der altkirchl.
Lit., II, 269; Batiffol, Litt. grecque (Paris, 1898); Idem,
L'Eglise naissante et le Catholicisme (Paris, 1909); see also
references under Cyprian of Carthage , Saint .
John Chapman.
First-Born
First-Born
The word, though casually taken in Holy Writ in a metaphorical
sense, is most generally used by the sacred writers to designate
the first male child in a family. The first-cast male animal is,
in the English Bibles, termed "firstling". The firstlings, both
human and animal, being considered as the best representatives
of the race, because its blood flows purest and strongest in
them, were commonly believed, among the early nomad Semitic
tribes, to belong to God in a special way. Hence, very likely,
the custom of sacrificing the first-cast animals; hence also the
prerogatives of the first-born son; hence, possibly, even some
of the superstitious practices which mar a few pages of the
history of Israel.
Among the Hebrews, as well as among other nations, the
first-born enjoyed special privileges. Besides having a greater
share in the paternal affection, he had everywhere the first
place after his father (Gen., xliii, 33) and a kind of directive
authority over his younger brothers (Gen., xxxvii, 21-22, 30,
etc.); a special blessing was reserved to him at his father's
death, and he succeeded him as the head of the family, receiving
a double portion among his brothers (Deut., xxi, 17). Moreover,
the first-birthright, up to the time of the promulgation of the
Law, included a right to the priesthood. Of course this latter
privilege, as also the headship of the family, to which it was
attached, continued in force only when brothers dwelt together
in the same house; for; as soon as they made a family apart and
separated, each one became the head and priest of his own house.
When God chose unto Himself the tribe of Levi to discharge the
office of priesthood in Israel, He wished that His rights over
the first-born should not thereby be forfeited. He enacted
therefore that every first-born be redeemed, one month after his
birth, for five sicles (Num., iii, 47; xviii, 15-16). This
redemption tax, calculated also to remind the Israelites of the
death inflicted upon the first-born of the Egyptians in
punishment of Pharaoh's stubbornness (Ex., xiii, 15-16), went to
the endowment-fund of the clergy. No law, however, stated that
the first-born should be presented to the Temple. It seems,
however, that after the Restoration parents usually took
advantage of the mother's visit to the sanctuary to bring the
child thither. This circumstance is recorded in St. Luke's
Gospel, in reference to Christ (ii, 22-38). It might be noted
here that St. Paul refers the title primogenitus to Christ
(Heb., i, 6), the "first-born" of the Father. The Messianic
sacrifice was the first-fruits of the Atonement offered to God
for man's redemption. It must be remembered, however, contrary
to what is too often asserted and seems, indeed, intimated by
the liturgical texts, that the "pair of turtle-doves, or two
young pigeons" mentioned in this connexion, were offered for the
purification of the mother, and not for the child. Nothing was
especially prescribed with regard to the latter.
As polygamy was, at least in early times, in vogue among the
Israelites, precise regulations were enacted to define who,
among the children, should enjoy the legal right of
primogeniture, and who were to be redeemed. The right of
primogeniture belonged to the first male child born in the
family, either of wife or concubine; the first child of any
woman having a legal status in the family (wife or concubine)
was to be redeemed, provided that child were a boy.
As the first-born, so were the firstlings of the Egyptians
smitten by the sword of the destroying angel, whereas those of
the Hebrews were spared. As a token of recognition, God declared
that all firstlings belonged to Him (Ex., xiii, 2; Num., iii,
3). They accordingly should be immolated. In case of clean
animals, as a calf, a lamb, or a kid (Num., xviii, 15-18), they
were, when one year old, brought to the sanctuary and offered in
sacrifice; the blood was sprinkled at the foot of the altar, the
fat burned, and the flesh belonged to the priests. Unclean
animals, however, which could not be immolated to the Lord, were
redeemed with money. Exception was made in the case of the
firstling of the ass, which was to be redeemed with a sheep
(Ex., xxxiv, 20) or its own price (Josephus, Ant. Jud., IV, iv,
4), or else to be slain (Ex., xiii, 13; xxxiv, 20) and buried in
the ground. Firstlings sacrificed in the temple should be
without blemish; such as were "lame or blind, or in any part
disfigured or feeble", were to be eaten unconditionally within
the gates of the owner's home-city.
CHARLES L. SOUVAY
First-Fruits
First-Fruits
The practice of consecrating first-fruits to the Deity is not a
distinctly Jewish one (cf. Iliad, IX, 529; Aristophanes, "Ran.",
1272; Ovid, "Metam.", VIII, 273; X, 431; Pliny, "Hist. Nat.",
IV, 26; etc.). It seems to have sprung up naturally among
agricultural peoples from the belief that the first -- hence the
best -- yield of the earth is due to God as an acknowledgment of
His gifts. "God served first", then the whole crop becomes
lawful food. The offering of the first-fruits was, in Israel,
regulated by laws enshrined in different parts of the Mosaic
books. These laws were, in the course of ages, supplemented by
customs preserved later on in the Talmud. Three entire treatises
of the latter, "Bikkurim", "Teru-moth", and "Hallah", besides
numerous other passages of both the Mishna and Gemarah, are
devoted to the explanation of these customs.
First-fruit offerings are designated in the Law by a threefold
name: Bikkurim, Reshith, and Terumoth. There remains much
uncertainty about the exact import of these words, as they seem
to have been taken indiscriminately at different epochs. If,
however, one considers the texts attentively, he may gather from
them a fairly adequate idea of the subject. There was a
first-fruit offering connected with the beginning of the
harvest. Leviticus, xxiii, 10-14, enacted that a sheaf of ears
should be brought to the priest, who, the next day after the
Sabbath, was to lift it up before the Lord. A holocaust, a
meal-offering, and a libation accompanied the ceremony; and
until it was performed no "bread, or parched corn, or frumenty
of the harvest" should be eaten. Seven weeks later two loaves,
made from the new harvest, were to be brought to the sanctuary
for a new offering. The Bikkurim consisted, it seems, of the
first ripened raw fruits; they were taken from wheat, barley,
grapes, figs, pomogranates, olives, and honey. The fruits
offered were supposed to be the choicest, and were to be fresh,
except in the case of grapes and figs, which might be offered
dried by Israelites living far from Jerusalem. No indication is
given in Scripture as to how much should be thus brought to the
sanctuary. But the custom was gradually introduced of
consecrating no less than one-sixtieth and no more than
one-fortieth of the crop (Bikk., ii, 2, 3, 4). Occasionally, of
course, there were extraordinary offerings, like that of the
fruit of a tree the fourth year after it bad been planted (Lev.,
xix, 23-25); one might also, for instance, set apart as a free
offering the harvest of a whole field.
No time was, at first, specially set apart for the offering; in
later ages, however, the feast of Dedication (25 Casleu) was
assigned as the limit (Bikk., i, 6; Hallah, iv, 10). In the Book
of Deuteronomy, xxvi, 1-11, directions are laid down as to the
manner in which these offerings should be made. The first-fruits
were brought in a basket to the sanctuary and presented to the
priest, with an expression of thanksgiving for the deliverance
of Israel from Egypt and the possession of the fertile land of
Palestine. A feast, shared by the Levite and the stranger,
followed. Whether the fruits offered were consumed in that meal
is not certain; Numbers, xviii, 13, seems to intimate that they
henceforth belonged to the priest, and Philo and Josephus
suppose the same.
Other offerings were made of the prepared fruits, especially
oil, wine, and dough (Deut., xviii, 4; Num., xv, 20-21; Lev.,
ii, 12, 14-15; cf. Ex., xxii, 29, in the Greek), and "the first
of the fleece". As in the case of the raw fruits, no quantity
was determined; Ezechiel affirms that it was one-sixtieth of the
harvest for wheat and barley and one-one hundredth for oil. They
were presented to the sanctuary with ceremonies analogous to
those alluded to above, although, unlike the Bikkurim, they were
not offered at the altar, but brought into the store-rooms of
the temple. They may he looked upon, therefore, not so much as
sacrificial matter as a tax for the support of the priests. (See
ANNATES.)
SMITH, The Religion of the Semites (2d ed., London, 1907):
WELLHAUSEN, Prolegomena to the History of Israel, tr. BLACK AND
MENZIEB (Edinburgh, 1885), 157-58; PHILO, De festo cophini; ID.,
De proemiis sacerdotum; JOSEPHUS, Ant. Jud., IV, viii, 22;
RELAND, Antiquitates sacroe; SCHUeRER, Geschichte des jued.
Volkes im Zeit. J. C. (Leipzig, 1898), II, 237-50.
CHARLES L. SOUVAY.
Fiscal Procurator
Fiscal Procurator
(Lat. PROCURATOR FISCALIS).
The duties of the fiscal procurator consist in preventing crime
and safeguarding ecclesiastical law. In case of notification or
denunciation it is his duty to institute proceedings and to
represent the law. His office is comparable to that of the state
attorney in criminal cases. The institution of the procuratores
regii or procureurs du roi (king's procurators) was established
in France during the thirteenth century, and has developed from
that time onward; though canon law, previous to that time, had
imposed on the bishops the duty of investigating the commission
of crimes and instituting the proper judicial proceedings. It is
to be noted that formerly canon law admitted the validity of
private as well as of public accusation or denunciation. At
present custom has brought it about that all criminal
proceedings in ecclesiastical courts are initiated exclusively
by the fiscal procurator.
The Congregation of Bishops and Regulars, 11 June, 1880, called
attention to the absolute necessity of the fiscal procurator in
every episcopal curia, as a safeguard for law and justice. The
fiscal procurator may be named by the bishop, either
permanently, or his term of office may he limited to individual
cases (see Third Plenary Council of Baltimore, 1884, no. 299;
App., p. 289). This official appears not only in criminal
proceedings but also in other ecclesiastical matters. In
matrimonial cases, canon law provides for a defender of the
matrimonial tie whose duty it is to uphold the validity of the
marriage, as long as its invalidity has not been proven in two
lower ecclesiastical courts. This defender of the matrimonial
tie represents both ecclesiastical law and public morality,
whose ultimate objects would not be attained if the validity or
invalidity of a marriage were decided in a too easy or informal
way. A similar office is that of the defender of the validity of
sacred orders and solemn vows. When the validity of either of
these acts, and their pertinent obligations, is attacked, it
becomes the duty of this official to bring forward whatever
arguments may go to establish their binding force. In all these
cases the defensor, like the fiscal procurator in criminal
processes, represents the public interests; the institution of
this office was all the more necessary, as it takes cognizance
of causes in which both parties frequently display a desire to
have the contract nullified. In the processes of beatification
and canonization it devolves on the promotor fidei to
investigate strictly the reasons urged in favour of
canonization, and to find out and emphasize all objections which
can possibly be urged against it. He is therefore popularly
known as the advocatus diaboli, i. e. "devil's lawyer". It is
the duty of the promotor fidei, therefore, to take up the
negative side in the discussion which has a place amongst the
preliminaries to beatification and canonization, and to
endeavour, by every legitimate means, to prevent the completion
of the process.
PERIES, Le Procureur Fiscal ou promoteur (Paris, 1897); LEGA, De
Judiciis Ecclesiasticis, Bk. I, vol. I, 2nd ed. (Rome, 1905).
FISCAL OF THE HOLY OFFICE
The Holy Office, i.e. the supreme court in the Catholic Church
for all matters that affect its faith or are closely connected
with its teaching, has an officialis fiscalis, whose duties are
similar to those of the fiscal procurator in episcopal courts.
The officialis fiscalis is present at all sessions of the Holy
Office, when criminal cases are sub judice, and as adviser to
the ordinary when the process is referred to the episcopal
court. By the reorganization of the Roman Curia, 29 June, 1908,
the Holy Office continues to retain its exclusive competency in
all cases of heresy and kindred crimes. The office of fiscalis
to this Congregation therefore remains unchanged.
JOSEPH LAURENTIUS.
Symbolism of the Fish
Symbolism of the Fish
Among the symbols employed by the primitive Christians, that of
the fish ranks probably first in importance. While the use of
the fish in pagan art as a purely decorative sign is ancient and
constant, the earliest literary reference to the symbolic fish
is made by Clement of Alexandria, born about 150, who recommends
his readers (Paedagogus, III, xi) to have their seals engraved
with a dove or a fish. Clement did not consider it necessary to
give any reason for this recommendation, from which it may be
safely be inferred that the meaning of both symbols was
unnecessary. Indeed, from monumental sources we know that the
symbolic fish was familiar to Christians long before the famous
Alexandrian was born; in such Roman monuments as the Capella
Greca and the Sacrament Chapels of the catacomb of St.
Callistus, the fish was depicted as a symbol in the first
decades of the second century.
The symbol itself may have been suggested by the miraculous
multification of the loaves and fishes or the repast of the
seven Disciples, after the Resurrection, on the shore of the Sea
of Galilee (John 21:9), but its popularity among Christians was
due principally, it would seem, to the famous acrostic
consisting of the initial letters of five Greek words forming
the word for fish (Ichthys), which words briefly but clearly
described the character of Christ and His claim to the worship
of believers: Iesous Christos Theou Yios Soter, i.e. Jesus
Christ, Son of God, Saviour. (See the discourse of Emperor
Constantine, "Ad coetum Sanctorum" c. xviii.) It is not
improbable that this Christian formula originated in Alexandria,
and was intended as a protest against the pagan apotheosis of
the emperors; on a coin from Alexandria of the reign of Domitian
(81-96) this emperor is styled Theou Yios (Son of God).
The word Ichthys, then, as well as the representation of a fish,
held for Christians a meaning of the highest significance; it
was a brief profession of faith in the divinity of Christ, the
Redeemer of mankind. Believers in this mystic Ichthys were
themselves : "little fishes", according to the well-known
passage of Tertullian (De baptismo, c. 1): "we, little fishes,
after the image of our Ichthys, Jesus Christ, are born in the
water".
The association of the Ichthys with the Eucharist is strongly
emphasized in the epitaph of Abercius, the second century Bishop
of Hieropolis in Phrygia (see Inscription of Abercius), and in
the somewhat later epitaph of Pectorius of Autun. Abercius tells
us on the aforesaid monument that in his journey from his
Asiatic home to Rome, everywhere on the way he received as food
"the Fish from the spring, the great, the pure", as well as
"wine mixed with water, together with bread". Pectorius also
speaks of the Fish as a delicious spiritual nurture supplied by
the "Saviour of the Saints". In the Eucharistic monuments this
idea is expressed repeatedly in the pictorial form; the food
before the banqueters is invariably bread and fish on two
separate dishes. The peculiar significance attached to the fish
in this relation is well brought out in such early frescoes as
the Fractio Panis scene in the cemetery of St. Priscilla, and
the fishes on the grass, in closest proximity to the baskets
containing bread and wine, in the crypt of Lucina. (See
Symbolism of the Eucharist.)
The fish symbol was not, however, represented exclusively with
symbols of the Eucharist; quite frequently it is found
associated with such other symbols as the dove, the anchor, and
the monogram of Christ. The monuments, too, on which it appears,
from the first to the fourth century, include frescoes,
sculptured representations, rings, seals, gilded glasses, as
well as enkolpia of various materials. The type of fish depicted
calls for no special observation, save that, from the second
century, the form of the dolphin was frequently employed. The
reason for this particular selection is presumed to be the fact
that, in popular esteem, the dolphin was regarded as friendly to
man.
Besides the Eucharistic frescoes of the catacombs a considerable
number of objects containing the fish-symbol are preserved in
various European museums, one of the most interesting, because
of the grouping of the fish with several other symbols, being a
carved gem in the Kircherian Museum in Rome. On the left is a
T-form anchor, with two fishes beneath the crossbar, while next
in order are a T-form cross with a dove on the crossbar and a
sheep at the foot, another T-cross as the mast of a ship, and
the good shepherd carrying on His shoulders the strayed sheep.
In addition to these symbols the five letters of the word
Ichthys are distributed round the border. Another ancient carved
gem represents a ship supported by a fish, with doves perched on
the mast and stern, and Christ on the waters rescuing St. Peter.
After the fourth century the symbolism of the fish gradually
disappeared; representations of fishes on baptismal fonts and on
bronze baptismal cups like those found at Rome and Trier, now in
the Kircherian Museum, are merely of an ornamental character,
suggested, probably by the water used in baptism.
MAURICE M. HASSETT
Philip Fisher
Philip Fisher
(An alias, real name THOMAS COPLEY)
Missionary, b. in Madrid, 1595-6; d. in Maryland, U. S., 1652.
He was the eldest son of William Copley of Gatton, England, of a
Catholic family of distinction who suffered exile in the reign
of Elizabeth. He arrived in Maryland in 1637, and, being a man
of great executive ability, took over the care of the mission,
"a charge which at that time required rather business men than
missionaries". In 1645, Father Fisher was wantonly seized and
carried in chains to England, with Father Andrew White, the
founder of the English mission in America. After enduring many
hardships he was released, when he boldly returned to Maryland
(Feb., 1648), where, after an absence of three years, he found
his flock in a more flourishing state than those who had opposed
and plundered them. That he made an effort to enter the
missionary field of Virginia, appears from a letter written 1
March, 1648, to the Jesuit General Caraffa in Rome, in which he
says: "A road has lately been opened through the forest to
Virginia; this will make it but a two days' journey, and both
places can now be united in one mission. After Easter I shall
wait upon the Governor of Virginia upon business of great
importance." Unfortunately there is no further record bearing on
the projected visit. Neill, in his "Terra Mariae" (p. 70), and
Smith in his "Religion under the Barons of Baltimore" (p. VII),
strangely confound this Father Thomas Copley of Maryland with an
apostate John Copley, who was never a Jesuit. Father Fisher is
mentioned with honourable distinction in the missionary annals
of Maryland, and, according to Hughes, was "the most
distinguished man among the fourteen Jesuits who had worked in
Maryland".
HUGHES, "History of the Society of Jesus in North America"
(London and New York, 1907), Text, I passim; Documents I, part
I; SHEA, "The Catholic Church in Colonial Days" (New York,
1886), 38, 46-47, 53; FOLEY, "Records of English Province S.J.
(London, 1882), VII, 255; DORSEY, "Life of Father Thomas
Copley", published in "Woodstock Letters", XIV, 223; "Woodstock
Letters", XI, 18-24; XII, 104-105; XV, 44, 47; OLIVER,
"Collections . . . Scotch, English and Irish Members of S.J."
(London, 1845), 91, 92; RUSSELL, "Maryland, the Land of the
Sanctuary" (Baltimore, 1907), 88, 125, 127, 156-159, 171-173;
"Dict. of National Biography" (New York, 1908), IV, 1114.
EDWARD P. SPILLANE
Daniel Fitter
Daniel Fitter
Born in Worcestershire, England, 1628; died at St. Thomas'
Priory, near Stafford, 6 Feb., 1700. He entered Lisbon College
at the age of nineteen, went through his studies with some
distinction, and was raised to the priesthood in 1651. A year or
two later, he returned to England, and was appointed chaplain to
William Fowler, Esq., of St. Thomas' Priory, near Stafford,
where he remained until his death. During the reign of James II,
he opened a school at Stafford, which was suppressed at the
revolution in 1688. At the period of excitement ensuing upon the
Titus Oates plot (1678), he, with a few others, upheld the
lawfulness of taking the oath then tendered to every well-known
Catholic. He himself subscribed it, and defended his action on
the ground of a common and legal use of the term "spiritual". In
consequence of this, when the chapter chose him as Vicar-General
of the Counties of Stafford, Derby, Cheshire and Salop, they
required that he should "sign a Declaration made by our Brethren
in Paris against the Oath of Supremacy".
In a letter to the clergy of England and Scotland (1684),
Cardinal Philip Howard recommended warmly the "Institutum
clericorum in communi viventium", founded in 1641 by the German
priest Bartolomaus Holzhauser, and approved by Innocent XI in
1680 and 1684. The institute met with eager acceptance in
England, and Fitter was appointed its first provincial president
and procurator for the Midland district. The association was,
however, dissolved shortly after his death by Bishop Giffard in
1702, on account of a misunderstanding between its members and
the rest of the secular clergy. Fitter had bequeathed property
to "The Common Purse" of the institute, with a life-interest in
favour of his elder brother Francis; but when the institute
ceased to exist, Francis, by a deed of assignment, established a
new trust (1703), called "The Common Fund" for the benefit of
the clergy of the district. This fund became subsequently known
as "The Johnson Fund" and still exists. Daniel Fitter also left
a fund for the maintenance of a priest, whose duty it should be
to reside in the county of Stafford and take spiritual charge of
the poor Catholics of the locality.
HENRY PARKINSON
James Fitton
James Fitton
Missionary, b. at Boston, Massachusetts, U.S.A., 10 April, 1805;
d. there, 15 Sept., 1881. His father, Abraham Fitton, went to
Boston from Preston, England; his mother was of Welsh origin and
a convert to the Faith. His primary education was received in
the schools of his native city, and his classical course was
made at Claremont, New Hampshire, at an academy conducted by
Virgil Horace Barber, an early New England convert to the Faith.
His theology he learned from the lips of Bishop Fenwick, by whom
he was ordained priest, 23 Dec., 1827. Thenceforth for nearly a
quarter of a century the whole of New England became the theatre
of his zealous missionary labours. Carrying a valise containing
vestments, chalice, and all necessaries for offering the Holy
Sacrifice, his breviary under his arm, he travelled, often on
foot, from Eastport and the New Brunswick line on the northeast,
to Burlington and Lake Champlain on the northwest; from Boston
in the east, to Great Barrington and the Berkshire Hills in the
west; from Providence and Newport in the southeast, to
Bridgeport and the New York State line in the southwest. In the
course of his ministry he was often exposed to insult and
hardship, but he considered these as trifles when souls were to
be saved. During his missionary career he was pastor of the
first Catholic church at Hartford, Connecticut, and at
Worcester, Massachusetts. He erected the church of Our Lady of
the Isle at Newport, Rhode Island. In 1840, while pastor of the
church at Worcester, he purchased the present site of Holy Cross
College, and erected a building for the advanced education of
Catholic young men. In 1842 he deeded the grounds and building
to Bishop Fenwick, who placed it under the care of the Jesuits.
In 1855 he was appointed by Bishop Fenwick pastor of the church
of the Most Holy Redeemer in East Boston. Here he laboured for
the remaining twenty-six years of his life, and built four more
churches. In 1877 he celebrated the golden jubilee of his
priesthood.
ARTHUR T. CONNOLLY
Henry Fitzalan
Henry Fitzalan
Twelfth Earl of Arundel, b. about 1511; d. in London, 24 Feb.,
1580 (O.S. 1579). Son of William, eleventh earl, and Lady Anne
Percy, he was godson to Henry VIII, in whose palace he was
educated. From 1540 he was governor of Calais till 1543, when he
succeeded to the earldom. In 1544 he beseiged and took Boulogne,
being made lord-chamberlain as a reward. In the reign of Edward
VI he opposed Protector Somerset and supported Warwick, who
eventually unjustly accused him of peculation and removed him
from the council. On the death of Edward he abandoned the cause
of Lady Jane Grey and proclaimed Mary as queen. Throughout her
reign he was in favour as lord-steward and was employed in much
diplomatic business. Even under Elizabeth he at first retained
his offices and power though distrusted by her ministers. Yet he
was too powerful to attack, and, being a widower, was considered
as a possible consort for the queen. But in 1564 he fell into
disgrace, and Elizabeth did not again employ him till 1568.
Being the leader of the Catholic party, he desired a marriage
between Mary, Queen of Scots, and his son-in-law, the Duke of
Norfolk, but was too cautious to commit himself, so that even
after the futile northern rebellion of 1569 he was recalled to
the council. But the discovery of the Ridolfi conspiracy, in
1571, again led to his confinement, and he spent the rest of his
life in retirement.
EDWIN BURTON
Maria Anne Fitzherbert
Maria Anne Fitzherbert
Wife of King George IV; b. 26 July, 1756 (place uncertain); d.
at Brighton, England, 29 March, 1837; eldest child of Walter
Smythe, of Bainbridge, Hampshire, younger son of Sir John
Smythe, of Eshe Hall, Durham and Acton Burnell Park, Salop, a
Catholic baronet. In 1775 she married Edward Weld, of Lulworth,
Dorset (uncle of Cardinal Weld), who died before the year was
out. Her next husband was Thomas Fitzherbert, of Swynnerton,
Staffordshire, whom she married in 1778 and who died in 1781. A
young and beautiful widow with a jointure of -L-2000 a year, she
took up her abode in 1782 at Richmond, Surrey, having at the
same time a house in town. In or about 1784 happened her first
meeting with George, Prince of Wales, then about twenty-two
years of age, she about six years older. He straightway fell in
love with her. Marriage with her princely suitor being legally
impossible, Mrs. Fitzherbert turned a deaf ear to the prince's
solicitations, to get rid of which she withdrew to the
Continent. However, on receipt of an honourable offer from the
prince, she returned after a while to England, and they were
privily married in her own London drawing-room and before two
witnesses, 15 Dec., 1785, the officiating minister being an
Anglican curate.
Thenceforth, though in separate houses, they lived together as
man and wife, she being treated on almost every hand with
unbounded respect and deference, until 1787, when, upon the
prince's application to Parliament for payment of his debts, Fox
authoritatively declared in the House of Commons that no
marriage between the prince and Mrs. Fitzherbert had ever taken
place. However, upon the prince's solemn and oft-repeated
assurance that Fox had no authority for this degrading denial,
the breach between the offended wife and her husband was healed.
So they continued to live together on a matrimonial footing
until 1794, when, being about to contract a forced legal
marriage with his cousin, Caroline of Brunswick, the prince very
reluctantly cast Mrs. Fitzherbert off, at the same time
continuing the pension of -L-3000 a year, which he had allowed
her ever since their marriage. Shortly after the birth of
Princess Charlotte in 1796, the prince, who hated the Princess
of Wales, separated from her and besought the forsaken Mrs.
Fitzherbert to return to him. This, after consultation with
Rome, she at length did in 1800, and remained with him some nine
years more, when they virtually parted. At last, in 1811,
because of a crowning affront put upon her on occasion of a
magnificent fete given at Carlton House by the prince, lately
made regent, at which entertainment no fixed place at the royal
table had been assigned her, she broke off connexion with the
prince for ever; withdrawing into private life upon an annuity
of -L-6000. Her husband, as King George IV, died in 1830, with a
locket containing her miniature round his neck, and was so
buried. Mrs. Fitzherbert survived him seven years, dying at the
age of eighty, at Brighton, where she was buried in the Catholic
church of St. John the Baptist, to the erection of which she had
largely contributed, and wherein a mural monument to her memory
is still to be seen.
Kebbel in Dict. Nat. Biog., s. v.; Gillow, Bibl. Dict. Eng.
Cath., s. v.; Annual Register for 1837 (London); Langdale,
Memoirs of Mrs. Fitzherbert (London, 1856); Wilkins, Mrs.
Fitzherbert and George IV (London, 1905).
C.T. Boothman
Sir Anthony Fitzherbert
Sir Anthony Fitzherbert
Judge, b. in 1470; d. 27 May, 1538. He was the sixth son of
Ralph Fitzherbert of Norbury, Derbyshire, and Elizabeth
Marshall. His brothers dying young, he succeeded his father as
lord of the manor of Norbury, an estate granted to the family in
1125 and still in their hands. Wood states that he was educated
at Oxford, but no evidence of this exists; nor is it known at
which of the inns of court he received his legal training,
though he is included in a list of Gray's Inn readers
(Douthwaite, Gray's Inn, p. 46.) He was called to the degree of
serjeant-at-law, 18 Nov., 1510, and six years later he was
appointed king's serjeant. He had already published (in 1514)
his great digest of the yearbooks which was the first systematic
attempt to provide a summary of English law. It was known as "La
Graunde Abridgement" and has often been reprinted, both entire
and in epitomes, besides forming the foundation of all
subsequent abridgments. He also brought out an edition of "Magna
charta cum diversis aliis statutis" (1519). In 1522 he was made
a judge of common pleas and was knighted; but his new honours
did not check his literary activity and in the following year
(1523) he published three works: one on law, "Diversite de
courtz et leur jurisdictions" (tr. by Hughes in 1646); one on
agriculture, "The Boke of Husbandire"; and one of law and
agriculture combined, "The Boke of Surveyinge and Improvements".
All three were frequently reprinted and though Sir Anthony's
authorship of the "Boke of Husbandrie" was formerly questioned
it is now regarded as established. Meanwhile his integrity and
ability caused much business to be entrusted to him.
In 1524 Fitzherbert was sent on a royal commission to Ireland;
Archbishop Warham appointed him by will sole arbitrator in the
administration of his estate; and in 1529 when Wolsey fell, he
was made a commissioner to hear chancery causes in place of the
chancellor, and he subsequently signed the articles of
impeachment against him. As one of the judges he unwillingly
took part in the trials of the martyrs Fisher, More, and Haile,
but he strongly disapproved of the king's ecclesiastical policy,
particularly the suppression of the monasteries and he bound his
children under oath never to accept or purchase any abbey lands.
In 1534 he brought out "that exact work, exquisitely penned"
(Coke, Reports X, Pref.), "La Novelle Natura Brevium", which
remained one of the classical English law books until the end of
the eighteenth century. His last works were the constantly
reprinted "L'Office et Auctoryte des justices de peas" (1538),
the first complete treatise on the subject, and "L'Office de
Viconts Bailiffes, Escheators, Constables, Coroners". Sir
Anthony was twice married, first to Dorothy Willoughby who died
without issue, and secondly to Matilda Cotton by whom he had a
large family. His descendants have always kept the Faith and
still own his estate of Norbury as well as the family seat at
Swynnerton.
EDWIN BURTON
Thomas Fitzherbert
Thomas Fitzherbert
Born 1552, at Swynnerton, Staffs, England; died 17 Aug., 1640,
at Rome. His father having died whilst Thomas was an infant, he
was, even as a child, the head of an important family and the
first heir born at Swynnerton, where his descendants have since
flourished and still remain Catholics. He was trained to piety
and firmness in his religion by his mother, and when sent to
Oxford in his sixteenth year he confessed his faith with a
courage that grew with the various trials, of which he has left
us an interesting memoir (Foley, "Records of English Province
S.J.", II, 210). At last he was forced to keep in hiding, and in
1572 he suffered imprisonment. In 1580 he married and had issue,
but he did not give up his works of zeal. When Campion and
Persons commenced their memorable mission, Fitzherbert put
himself at their service, and helped Campion in the preparation
of his "Decem Rationes" by verifying quotations and copying
passages from the fathers in various libraries, to which it
would have been impossible for the Jesuit to obtain admission.
Unable at last to maintain his position in face of the
ever-growing persecution, he left England in 1582, and took up
his residence in the north of France. Here, as a lay Catholic of
birth, means, and unexceptionable character, he was much trusted
by the Catholic leaders, and as sedulously watched by
Walsingham's emissaries, whose letters contain frequent
insinuations against his intentions and ulterior objects (see
Foley, "Records of English Province S.J.", II, 220-228). His
wife died in 1588, and he soon afterwards took a vow of
celibacy. He is next found in the household of the young Duke of
Feria, whose mother was Lady Anne Dormer. With him or in his
service he lived in Flanders, Spain, Milan, Naples, and Rome for
some twenty years, until the duke died in 1607, on the point of
setting out for a diplomatic mission to Germany, on which
Fitzherbert was to have accompanied him. It was during this
period that he was charged in 1598 by Squire with having tempted
him to murder Queen Elizabeth; in 1595 a charge of contradictory
implication had been preferred against him to the Spanish
Government, viz. that he was an agent of Elizabeth. Both charges
led to the enhancement of his reputation. An interesting series
of 200 letters from the duke to him is preserved in the archives
of the Archdiocese of Westminster. In 1601, while in Spain, he
felt moved to take a vow to offer himself for the priesthood,
and he was ordained in Rome 24 March, 1602. After this he acted
as Roman agent for the archpriest Harrison until he was
succeeded, in 1609, by the future bishop, Richard Smith. But in
1606 he had made a third vow, namely, to enter the Society of
Jesus, which he did about the year 1613. He was soon given the
important post of superior in Flanders, 1616 to 1618, afterwards
recalled and made rector of the English College, Rome, from 1618
to 1639. He died there, closing, at the age of eighty-eight
years, a life that had been filled with an unusual variety of
important duties. His principal works are: "A Defence of the
Catholycke Cause, By T.F., with an Apology of his innocence in a
fayned conspiracy of Edward Squire" (St-Omer, 1602); "A Treatise
concerning Policy and Religion" (Douai, 1606-10, 1615),
translated into Latin in 1630. This work was highly valued for
its sound and broad-minded criticism of the lax political
principles professed in those days. He also wrote books in the
controversy that grew out of King James's Oath of Allegiance: "A
Supplement to [Father Persons's] the Discussion of M. D. Barlow"
(St-Omer, 1613); "A Confutation of certaine Absurdities uttered
by M. D. Andrews" (St-Omer, 1613); "Of the Oath of Fidelity"
(St-Omer, 1614); "The Obmutesce of F. F. to the Epphata of D.
Collins" (St-Omer, 1621). We have also from his pen a
translation of Turcellini's "Life of St. Francis Xavier" (Paris,
1632).
J.H. POLLEN
William John Fitzpatrick
William John Fitzpatrick
Historian, b. in Dublin, Ireland, 31 Aug., 1830; d. there 24
Dec., 1895. The son of a rich merchant, he had ample means to
indulge his peculiar tastes, and these were for biography, and
especially for seeking out what was hitherto unknown and not
always desirable to publish about great men. Educated partly at
a Protestant school, partly at Clongowes Wood College, he early
took to writing and in 1855 published his first work -- "The
Life, Times and Correspondence of Lord Cloncurry". The same year
he wrote a series of letters to "Notes and Queries" charging Sir
Walter Scott with plagiarism in his Waverley novels, and
attributing the chief credit of having written these novels to
Sir Walter's brother Thomas. The latter was dead, but his
daughters repudiated Fitzpatrick's advocacy and their father's
supposed claims, and the matter ended there. In 1859 Fitzpatrick
published "The Friends, Foes and Adventures of Lady Morgan".
From that date to his death, his pen was never idle. His
research was great, his industry a marvel, his patience and care
immense, nor is he ever consciously unjust. For these reasons,
though his style is unattractive, his works are valuable,
especially to the Irish historical student. Notable examples are
"The Sham Squire" (1866), "Ireland before the Union" (1867),
"The Correspondence of Daniel O'Connell" (1888), "Secret Service
under Pitt" (1892). Fitzpatrick also wrote works dealing with
Archbishop Whately, Charles Lever, Rev. Dr. Lanigan, Father Tom
Burke, O.P., and Father James Healy of Bray. In 1876 he was
appointed professor of history by the Hibernian Academy of Arts.
Fitzpatrick's painstaking research as well as his spirit of fair
play are specially to be commended and have earned words of
praise from two men differing in many other things -- Lecky and
Gladstone.
E.A. D'ALTON
Richard Fitzralph
Richard Fitzralph
Archbishop of Armagh, b. at Dundalk, Ireland, about 1295; d. at
Avignon, 16 Dec., 1360. He studied in Oxford, where we first
find mention of him in 1325 as an ex-fellow and teacher of
Balliol College. He was made doctor of theology before 1331, and
was chancellor of Oxford University in 1333. In 1334 he was made
chancellor of Lincoln Cathedral, and in Jan., 1335, canon and
prebendary of Lichfield, "notwithstanding that he has canonries
and prebends of Crediton and Bosham, and has had provision made
for him of the Chancellorship of Lincoln and the canonries and
prebends of Armagh and Exeter, all of which he is to resign"
(Bliss, Calendar of Entries in Papal Registers, II, 524). He was
archdeacon of Chester when made dean of Lichfield in 1337. On 31
July, 1346, he was consecrated Archbishop of Armagh.
Fitzralph was a man who pre-eminently joined the speculative
temperament with the practical. One of the great Scholastic
luminaries of his day, and a close friend of the scholarly
Richard of Bury, he fostered learning among his priests by
sending many of them to take higher studies in Oxford. He was
zealous too in visiting the various church provinces, and in
bettering financial as well as spiritual conditions in his own
see. He contended for his primatial rights against the immunity
claimed by the See of Dublin; and on various occasions acted as
peacemaker between the English and the Irish. He was in great
demand as a preacher, and many of his sermons are still extant
in manuscript. Whilst at Avignon in 1350, Fitzralph presented a
memorial from the English clergy reciting certain complaints
against the mendicant orders. After serving on a commission
appointed by Clement VI to inquire into the points at issue, he
embodied his own views in the treatise "De Pauperie Salvatoris",
which deals with the subject of evangelical poverty, as well as
the questions then agitated concerning dominion, possession, and
use, and the relation of these to the state of grace in man.
Part of this work is printed by Poole in his edition of Wyclif's
"De Dominio Divino" (London, 1890). It was probably during this
visit that Fitzralph also took part in the negotiations going on
between the Armenian delegates and the pope. He composed an
elaborate apologetico-polemic work, entitled "Summa in
Quaestionibus Armenorum" (Paris, 1511), in which he displayed
his profound knowledge of Scripture with telling effect in
refuting the Greek and Armenian heresies.
Fitzralph's controversy with the friars came to a crisis when he
was cited to Avignon in 1357. Avowing his entire submission to
the authority of the Holy See, he defended his attitude towards
the friars in the plea entitled "Defensorium Curatorum" (printed
in Goldast's "Monarchia" and elsewhere). He maintained as
probable that voluntary mendicancy is contrary to the teachings
of Christ. His main plea, however, was for the withdrawal of the
privileges of the friars in regard to confessions, preaching,
burying, etc. He urged a return to the purity of their original
institution, claiming that these privileges undermined the
authority of the parochial clergy. The friars were not molested,
but by gradual legislation harmony was restored between them and
the parish clergy. Fitzralph's position, however, was not
directly condemned, and he died in peace at Avignon. In 1370 his
remains were transferred to St. Nicholas' church, Dundalk;
miracles were reported from his tomb and for several centuries
his memory was held in saintly veneration. His printed works are
mentioned above. His "Opus in P. Lombardi Sententias" and
several other works (list in the "Catholic University Bulletin",
XI, 243) are still in manuscript.
JOHN J. GREANEY
Henry Fitzsimon
Henry Fitzsimon
(Fitz Simon).
Jesuit, b. 1566 (or 1569), in Dublin, Ireland; d. 29 Nov., 1643
(or 1645), probably at Kilkenny. He was educated a Protestant at
Oxford (Hart Hall, and perhaps Christ Church), 1583-1587. Going
thence to the University of Paris, he became a zealous
protagonist of Protestantism, "with the firm intention to have
died for it, if need had been". But having engaged in
controversy with "an owld English Jesuit, Father Thomas
Darbishire, to my happiness I was overcome. " Having embraced
Catholicism, he visited Rome and Flanders, where in 1592, he
"elected to militate under the Jesuits' standard, because they
do most impugn the impiety of heretics". In 1595 there was a
call for Jesuit laborers for Ireland, which had been deprived of
them for ten years. He at once offered himself for the post of
danger, and he shares with Father Archer the honour of having
refound that mission on a basis that proved permanent amid
innumerable dangers and trials. Keeping chiefly to Dublin and
Drogheda, he was wondrously successful in reconciling
Protestants, and he loudly and persistently challenged the chief
Anglican divines to disputation. With the same fighting spirit,
he laughed at his capture in 1600. "Now", he said, "my
adversaries cannot say that they do not know where to find me",
and he would shout his challenges from his prison window at
every passing parson. But his opponents, James Ussher, Meredith
Hanmer, and John Rider, in spite of their professions, carefully
avoided coming to close quarters with their redoubtable
adversary.
Banished in 1604, he visited Spain, Rome, and Flanders,
1611-1620, everywhere earnest and active with voice and pen in
the cause of Ireland. At the outbreak of the Thirty Years War in
1620, he served as chaplain to the Irish soldiers in the
imperial army, and published a diary, full of life and interest,
of his adventurous experiences. He probably returned to Flanders
in 1621 and in 1630 went back to Ireland where he continued to
work with energy and success until the outbreak of the Civil War
(1640). In the ensuing tumult and confusion, we are unable to
follow his later movements with certainty. At one time we hear
he was under sentence of death, from which he escaped in the
winter of 1641 to the Wicklow Mountains, and after many
sufferings died in peace, probably in Kilkenny. "Not many, if
any Irishmen", says his biographer, reflecting on the many
universities, towns, courts, and armies which Father Fitzsimon
had visited, "have known, or been known to, so many men of
mark". Besides one controversial work in manuscript, not known
to previous biographers, now at Oscott College, Birmingham,
which is entitled "A revelation of contradictions in reformed
articles of religion", dated 1633, he wrote two manuscript
treatises, now lost, against Rider, and afterwards printed
against him "A Catholic Confutation" (Rouen, 1608);
Britannomachia Ministrorum" (1614); "Pugna Pragensis" (1620) and
"Buquoii Quadrimestreiter, Auctore Constantio Peregrino"
(Bruenn, 1621, several editions, also Italian and English
versions); Catalogus Praecipuorum Sanctorum Hiberniae" (1611,
several editions), important as drawing attention to Irish
hagiography at a time of great depression. His "Words of Comfort
to Persecuted Catholics", "Letters from a Cell in Dublin
Castle", and "Diary of the Bohemian War of 1620", together with
a sketch of his life, were published by Father Edmund Hogan,
S.J. (Dublin, 1881).
Hogan, Distinguished Irishmen of the Sixteenth Century (Dublin,
1894), 198-310; Foley, Records S. J., VII, 260; Sommervogel,
Bibliotheque, III, 766-768; Cooper in Dict. Nat Biog., s. v.
J.H. POLLEN
Thomas Fitz-Simons
Thomas Fitz-Simons
American merchant, b. in Ireland, 1741; d. at Philadelphia,
U.S.A., 26 Aug., 1811. There is no positive date of his arrival
in America, but church records in Philadelphia show he was there
in 1758. In 1763 he was married to Catherine, sister of George
Meade, and he was Meade's partner as a merchant until 1784. In
the events that led up to the revolt of the colonists against
England he took a prominent part. He was one of the deputies who
met in conference in Carpenter's Hall, Philadelphia, out of
which conference grew the Continental Congress that assembled 4
Sept., 1774, and of which he was a member. His election as one
of the Provincial Deputies in July, 1774, is the first instance
of a Catholic being named for a public office in Pennsylvania.
At the breaking-out of hostilities he organized a company of
militia and took part in the Trenton campaign in New Jersey.
After this service in the field he returned to Philadelphia and
was active with other merchants in providing for the needs of
the army.
On 12 Nov., 1782, he was elected a member of the Congress of the
old Confederacy and was among the leaders in its deliberations.
He was a member of the Convention that met in Philadelphia 25
May, 1787, and framed the Constitution of the United States.
Daniel Carroll of Maryland being the only other Catholic member.
In this convention Fitz-Simons voted against universal suffrage
and in favour of limiting it to free-holders. Under this
constitution he was elected a member of the first Congress of
the United States and in it served on the Committee on Ways and
Means. In politics he was an ardent Federalist. He was
re-elected to the second and the third Congresses, but was
defeated for the fourth, in 1794, and this closed his political
career. Madison wrote to Jefferson, on 16 Nov., 1794, that the
failure of Fitz-Simons to be selected was a "stinging blow for
the aristocracy". The records of Congress show that he was among
the very first, if not the first, to advocate the fundamental
principles of a protective tariff system to help American
industries. When Washington was inaugurated the first president,
Fitz-Simons was one of the four laymen, Charles and Daniel
Carroll of Maryland, and Dominic Lynch of New York being the
others, to sign the address of congratulation presented to him
by the Catholics of the country. He was among the founders of
Georgetown College, and was considered during his long life one
of the most enlightened merchants in the United States. On all
questions connected with commerce and finance his advice was
always sought and regarded with respect in the operations that
laid the foundation of the commercial prosperity of the new
republic.
THOMAS F. MEEHAN
Placidus Fixlmillner
Placidus Fixlmillner
Astromomer, b. at Achleuthen near Kremsmuenster, Austria, in
1721; d. at Kremsmuenster, Austria, 27 August, 1791. He received
his early education at Salzburg, where he displayed a talent for
mathematics. He joined the Benedictines at the age of sixteen
and became distinguished for his broad scholarship. In 1756 he
published a small treatise entitled "Reipublicae sacrae origines
divinae". He intended to continue this work but the transit of
Venus in 1761 again aroused his interest in mathematics. Though
already forty years of age he resumed his old studies with
ardour, and an opportunity soon presented itself for work in
astronomy. He was appointed director of the observatory of
Kremsmuenster, which had been established by his uncle in 1748
while abbot. His first task was to improve the equipment and
have new instruments constructed, and as soon as possible he
determined the latitude and longitude of the observatory. He
continued in charge of the observatory until his death and by
his industry accumulated a number of observations of great
variety and value. He did not, however, devote all his time to
astronomy. For many years he was in charge of the college
connected with the abbey and at the same time acted as professor
of canon law. As such he was honoured with the dignity of notary
Apostolic of the Roman Court. Fixlmillner is best known for his
work in astronomy. He was one of the first to compute the orbit
of Uranus after its discovery by Herschel. His numerous
observations of Mercury were of much service to Lalande in
constructing tables of that planet. Besides the treatise already
mentioned he was the author of "Meridianus speculae astronomicae
cremifanensis" (Steyer, 1765), which treats of his observations
in connexion with the latitude and longitude of his observatory,
and "Decennium astronomicum" (Steyer, 1776). After his death his
successor P. Derfflinger published the "Acta cremifanensia a
Placido Fixlmillner" (Steyer, 1791), which contain his
observations from 1776 to 1791.
SCHLICHTEGROLL, Nekrolog der Deutschen (Gotha, 1791-1806),
supplement; ZACH, Ephemerides geographiques (1799); NICOLLET in
Biog. Universelle, XIV.
H. M. BROCK
Armand-Hippolyte-Louis Fizeau
Armand-Hippolyte-Louis Fizeau
Physicist, b. at Paris, 23 Sept., 1819; d. at Nanteuil,
Seine-et-Marne, 18 Sept., 1896. His father, a distinguished
physician and professor of medicine in Paris during the
Restoration, left him an independent fortune, so that he was
able to devote himself to scientific research. He attended
Stanislas College and then began to study medicine, but had to
abandon it on account of ill-health and travelled for awhile.
Then followed Arago's lessons at the Observatory, Regnault on
optics at the college of France, and a thorough study of his
brother's notebooks of the courses at the Ecole Polytechnique.
In 1839 he became interested in the new photography and
succeeded in getting permanent pictures by the daguerreotype.
Foucault came to consult him about this work and became
associated with him in their epoch-making experiments in optics,
showing the identity of radiant heat and light, the regularity
of the light vibrations, and the validity of the undulatory
theory. Just as they were ready to develop the experimentum
crucis (see FOUCAULT) overthrowing the emission theory, they
parted company and worked independently.
Fizeau was the first to determine experimentally the velocity of
light (1849). He used a rotating cogwheel and a fixed mirror
several miles distant; light passed between two teeth of the
wheel to the distant mirror and then returned. If the wheel
turned fast enough to obscure the reflection, then the reflected
beam struck a cog. The time it took the wheel to move the width
of one tooth was then equal to the time it took the light to
travel twice the distance between the wheel an the mirror. He
also experimented successfully to show that the ether is carried
along by moving substances, since light travels faster through a
stream of water in the direction of its motion than in the
opposite direction. In his measurements of vanishingly small
distances, such as the expansion of crystals, he made use of the
extremely small and very regular wave-length of light. His
addition of a condenser in the primary circuit of the induction
coil increased the effectiveness of this device considerably. On
the recommendation of the Academy of Sciences he was awarded the
Grand Prix (10,000 francs) of the Institute in 1856. He was
elected a member of the Academy of Sciences in 1860, an a member
of the Bureau des Longitudes in 1878. He received the decoration
of the Legion of Honour in 1849 and became officer in 1875. In
1866 the Royal Society of London awarded him the Rumford Medal.
Cornu says of him: "He was a practical and convinced Christian
and did not hide that fact." In the presidential address before
the academy (Comptes Rendus, 1879), Fizeau calls attention to
"the dignity and independence of natural science as well as to
its limits of action, preventing it from interfering in
philosophic or social questions, and not permitting it to put
itself in opposition to the noble emotions of the heart nor to
the pure voice of conscience". Most of his published works
appeared in the "Comptes Rendus" and in the "Annales de physique
et de chimie". A few of the titles are: "Sur la dageurreotypie";
"Sur l'interference entre deux rayons dans le cas de grandes
differences de marche"; "Vitesse de la lumiere"; "Interference
des rayons calorifiques"; "Refraction differentielle"; "Vitesse
de l'electricite"; "Dilatation des cristaux".
GRAY, Nature (London, 1896); CORNU, Annuaire pour l'an 1898 of
the Bureau des Longitudes (Paris)
WILLIAM FOX
Flabellum
Flabellum
The flabellum, in liturgical use, is a fan made of leather,
silk, parchment, or feathers intended to keep away insects from
the Sacred Species and from the priest. It was in use in the
sacrifices of the heathens and in the Christian Church from very
early days, for in the Apostolic Constitutions, a work of the
fourth century, we read (VIII, 12): "Let two of the deacons, on
each side of the altar, hold a fan, made up of thin membranes,
or of the feathers of the peacock, or of fine cloth, and let
them silently drive away the small animals that fly about, that
they may not come near to the cups". Its use was continued in
the Latin Church to about the fourteenth century. In the Greek
Church to the present day, the deacon, at his ordination,
receives the hagion ripidion, or sacred fan, which is generally
made to the likeness of a cherub's six-winged face, and in the
sacrifice of the Mass he waves it gently over the species from
the time of the Offertory to the Communion -- in the Liturgy of
St. Basil only during the Consecration. Among the ornaments
found belonging to the church of St. Riquier, in Ponthieu (813),
there is a silver flabellum (Migne, P. L., CLXXIV, 1257), and
for the chapel of Cisoin, near Lisle, another flabellum of
silver is noted in the will of Everard (died 937), the founder
of that abbey. When, in 1777, Martene wrote his "Voyage
Litteraire", the Abbey of Tournus, on the Saone in France,
possessed an old flabellum, which had an ivory handle two feet
long, and was beautifully carved; the two sides of the ivory
circular disc were engraved with fourteen figures of saints.
Pieces of this fan, dating from the eighth century, are in the
Musee Cluny at Paris, and in the Collection Carrand. The
circular disc is also found in the Slavic flabellum of the
thirteenth century, preserved at Moscow, and in the one shown in
the Megaspileon monastery in Greece. On this latter disc are
carved the Madonna and Child and it is encircled by eight
medallions containing the images of cherubim and of the Four
Evangelists. The inventory, taken in 1222, of the treasury of
Salisbury, enumerates a silver fan and two of parchment. The
richest and most beautiful specimen is the flabellum of the
thirteenth century in the Abbey of Kremsmuenster in Upper
Austria. It has the shape of a Greek cross and is ornamented
with fretwork and the representation of the Resurrection of Our
Lord. A kind of fan with a hoop of little bells is used by the
Maronites and other Orientals and is generally made of silver or
brass.
Apart from the foregoing liturgical uses, a flabellum, in the
shape of a fan, later of an umbrella or canopy, was used as a
mark of honour for bishops and princes. Two fans of this kind
are used at the Vatican whenever the pope is carried in state on
the sedia gestatoria to or from the altar or audience-chamber.
Through the influence of Count Ditalmo di Brozza, the fans
formerly used at the Vatican were, in 1902, presented to Mrs.
Joseph Drexel of Philadelphia, U. S. A., by Leo XIII, and in
return she gave a new pair to the Vatican. The old ones are
exhibited in the museum of the University of Pennsylvania. They
are splendid creations. The spread is formed of great ostrich
plumes tipped with peacock feathers; on the sticks are the papal
arms, worked in a crimson field in heavy gold, the crown studded
with rubies and emeralds. St. Paul's Cathedral, London, had a
fan made of peacock feathers, and York Cathedral's inventory
mentions a silver handle of a fan, which was gilded and had upon
it the enamelled picture of the bishop. Haymo, Bishop of
Rochester (died 1352), gave to his church a fan of silver with
an ivory handle.
ROCK, Church of our Fathers (London, 1904), II, 209; DU CANGE,
Glossarium (Niort, 1885); STREBER in kirchenlexicon, s. v.;
KRAUS, Gesch. der kirchl. Kunst (Freiburg, 1896), I, 552.
FRANCIS MERSHMAN.
Aelia Flaccilla
AElia Flaccilla
(Plakilla)
Empress, wife of Theodosius the Great, died c. a.d. 385 or 386.
Like Theodosius himself, his first wife, AElia Flaccilla, was of
Spanish descent. She may have been the daughter of Claudius
Antonius, Prefect of Gaul, who was consul in 382. Her marriage
with Theodosius probably took place in the year 376, when his
father, the comes Theodosius, fell into disfavour and he himself
withdrew to Cauca in Gallaecia, for her eldest son, afterwards
Emperor Arcadius, was born towards the end of the following
year. In the succeeding years she presented two more children to
her husband Honorius (384), who later became emperor, and
Pulcheria, who died in early childhood, shortly before her
mother. Gregory of Nyssa states expressly that she had three
children; consequently the Gratian mentioned by St. Ambrose,
together with Pulcheria, was probably not her son. Flaccilla
was, like her husband, a zealous supporter of the Nicene Creed
and prevented the conference between the emperor and the Arian
Eunomius (Sozomen, Hist. eccl., VII, vi). On the throne she was
a shining example of Christian virtue and ardent charity. St.
Ambrose describes her as "a soul true to God" (Fidelis anima
Deo. -- "De obitu Theodosii", n. 40, in P. L., XVI, 1462). In
his panegyric St. Gregory of Nyssa bestowed the highest praise
on her virtuous life and pictured her as the helpmate of the
emperor in all good works, an ornament of the empire, a leader
of justice, an image of beneficence. He praises her as filled
with zeal for the Faith, as a pillar of the Church, as a mother
of the indigent. Theodoret in particular exalts her charity and
benevolence (Hist. eccles., V, xix, ed. Valesius, III, 192 sq.).
He tells us how she personally tended cripples, and quotes a
saying of hers: "To distribute money belongs to the imperial
dignity, but I offer up for the imperial dignity itself personal
service to the Giver." Her humility also attracts a special meed
of praise from the church historian. Flaccilla was buried in
Constantinople, St. Gregory of Nyssa delivering her funeral
oration. She is venerated in the Greek Church as a saint, and
her feast is kept on 14 September. The Bollandists (Acta SS.,
Sept., IV, 142) are of the opinion that she is not regarded as a
saint but only as venerable, but her name stands in the Greek
Menaea and Synaxaria followed by words of eulogy, as is the case
with the other saints (cf. e.g. Synaxarium eccl.
Constantinopolitanae, ed. Delehaye, Brussels, 1902, col. 46,
under 14 Sept.).
GREGORY OF NYSSA, Oratio funebris de Placilla in P. G., XLVI,
877-92; THEMISTIUS, Oratio, ed. DINDORF, 637 sqq.; TILLEMONT.
Histoire des empereurs, V (Brussels, 1732), 62, 109 sq., notes
33, 40 sq.; ARGLES in Dict. Christ. Biog., s. v. Flaccilla (1);
GUeLDENPENNING AND IFLAND, Der Kaiser Theodosius der Grosse
(Halle, 1878), 56, 132.
J. P. KIRSCH.
Flagellants
Flagellants
A fanatical and heretical sect that flourished in the thirteenth
and succeeding centuries, Their origin was at one time
attributed to the missionary efforts of St. Anthony of Padua, in
the cities of Northern Italy, early in the thirteenth century;
but Lempp (Zeitschrift fuer Kirchengeschichte, XII, 435) has
shown this to be unwarranted. Every important movement, however,
has its forerunners, both in the idea out of which it grows and
in specific acts of which it is a culmination. And, undoubtedly,
the practice of self-flagellation, familiar to the folk as the
ascetic custom of the more severe orders (such as the
Camaldolese, the Cluniacs, the Dominicans), had but to be
connected in idea with the equally familiar penitential
processions popularized by the Mendicants about 1233, to prepare
the way for the great outburst of the latter half of the
thirteenth century. It is in 1260 that we first hear of the
Flagellants at Perugia. The terrible plague of 1259, the
long-continued tyranny and anarchy throughout the Italian
States, the prophecies concerning Antichrist and the end of the
world by Joachim of Flora and his like, had created a mingled
state of despair and expectation among the devout lay-folk of
the middle and lower classes. Then there appeared a famous
hermit of Umbria, Raniero Fasani, who organized a brotherhood of
"Disciplinati di Gesu Cristo", which spread rapidly throughout
Central and Northern Italy. The brotherhoods were known by
various names in various localities (Battuti, Scopatori,
Verberatori, etc.), but their practices were very similar
everywhere. All ages and conditions were alike subject to this
mental epidemic. Clergy and laity, men and women, even children
of tender years, scourged themselves in reparation for the sins
of the whole world. Great processions, amounting sometimes to
10,000 souls, passed through the cities, beating themselves, and
calling the faithful to repentance. With crosses and banners
borne before them by the clergy, they marched slowly through the
towns. Stripped to the waist and with covered faces, they
scourged themselves with leathern thongs till the blood ran,
chanting hymns and canticles of the Passion of Christ, entering
the churches and prostrating themselves before the altars. For
thirty-three days and a half this penance was continued by all
who undertook it, in honour of the years of Christ's life on
earth. Neither mud nor snow, cold nor heat, was any obstacle.
The processions continued in Italy throughout 1260, and by the
end of that year had spread beyond the Alps to Alsace, Bavaria,
Bohemia, and Poland. In 1261, however, the ecclesiastical and
civil authorities awoke to the danger of such an epidemic,
although its undesirable tendencies, on this occasion, were
rather political than theological. In January the pope forbade
the processions, and the laity realized suddenly that behind the
movement was no sort of ecclesiastical sanction. It ceased
almost as quickly as it had started, and for some time seemed to
have died out. Wandering flagellants are heard of in Germany in
1296. In Northern Italy, Venturino of Bergamo, a Dominican,
afterwards beatified, attempted to revive the processions of
flagellants in 1334, and led about 10,000 men, styled the
"Doves", as far as Rome. But he was received with laughter by
the Romans, and his followers deserted him. He went to Avignon
to see the pope, by whom he was promptly relegated to his
monastery, and the movement collapsed.
In 1347 the Black Death swept across Europe and devastated the
Continent for the next two years. In 1348 terrible earthquakes
occurred in Italy. The scandals prevalent in Church and State
intensified in the popular mind the feeling that the end of all
things was come. With extraordinary suddenness the companies of
Flagellants appeared again, and rapidly spread across the Alps,
through Hungary and Switzerland. In 1349 they had reached
Flanders, Holland, Bohemia, Poland, and Denmark. By September of
that year they had arrived in England, where, however, they met
with but little success. The English people watched the fanatics
with quiet interest, even expressing pity and sometimes
admiration for their devotion; but no one could be induced to
join them, and the attempt at proselytism failed utterly. Mean-
while in Italy the movement, in accordance with the temperament
of the people, so thorough, so ecstatic, yet so matter-of-fact
and practical in religious matters, spread rapidly through all
classes of the community. Its diffusion was marked and aided by
the popular laudi, folk-songs of the Passion of Christ and the
Sorrows of Our Lady, while in its wake there sprang up
numberless brotherhoods devoted to penance and the corporal
works of mercy. Thus the "Battuti" of Siena, Bologna, Gubbio,
all founded Case di Dio, which were at once centres at which
they could meet for devotional and penitential exercises, and
hospices in which the sick and destitute were relieved. Though
tendencies towards heresy soon became apparent, the sane Italian
faith was unfavourable to its growth. The confraternities
adapted themselves to the permanent ecclesiastical organization,
and not a few of them have continued, at least as charitable
associations, until the present day. It is noticeable that the
songs of the Laudesi during their processions tended more and
more to take on a dramatic character. From them developed in
time the popular mystery-play, whence came the beginnings of the
Italian drama.
As soon, however, as the Flagellant movement crossed the Alps
into Teutonic countries, its whole nature changed. The idea was
welcomed with enthusiasm; a ceremonial was rapidly developed,
and almost as rapidly a specialized doctrine, that soon
degenerated into heresy. The Flagellants became an organized
sect, with severe discipline and extravagant claims. They wore a
white habit and mantle, on each of which was a red cross, whence
in some parts they were called the "Brotherhood of the Cross".
Whosoever desired to join this brotherhood was bound to remain
in it for thirty-three and a half days, to swear obedience to
the "Masters" of the organization, to possess at least four
pence a day for his support, to be reconciled to all men, and,
if married, to have the sanction of his wife. The ceremonial of
the Flagellants seems to have been much the same in all the
northern cities. Twice a day, proceeding slowly to the public
square or to the principal church, they put off their shoes,
stripped themselves to the waist and prostrated themselves in a
large circle. By their posture they indicated the nature of the
sins they intended to expiate, the murderer lying on his back,
the adulterer on his face, the perjurer on one side holding up
three fingers, etc. First they were beaten by the "Master",
then, bidden solemnly in a prescribed form to rise, they stood
in a circle and scourged themselves severely, crying out that
their blood was mingled with the Blood of Christ and that their
penance was preserving the whole world from perishing. At the
end the "Master" read a letter which was supposed to have been
brought by an angel from heaven to the church of St. Peter in
Rome. This stated that Christ, angry at the grievous sins of
mankind, had threatened to destroy the world, yet, at the
intercession of the Blessed Virgin, had ordained that all who
should join the brotherhood for thirty-three and a half days
should be saved. The reading of this "letter", following the
shock to the emotions caused by the public penance of the
Flagellants, aroused much excitement among the populace. In
spite of the protests and criticism of the educated, thousands
enrolled themselves in the brotherhood. Great processions
marched from town to town, with crosses, lights, and banners
borne before them. They walked slowly, three or four abreast,
bearing their knotted scourges and chanting their melancholy
hymns. As the number grew, the pretences of the leaders
developed. They professed a ridiculous horror of even accidental
contact with women and insisted that it was of obligation to
fast rigidly on Fridays. They cast doubts on the necessity or
even desirability of the sacraments, and even pretended to
absolve one another, to cast out evil spirits, and to work
miracles. They asserted that the ordinary ecclesiastical
jurisdiction was suspended and that their pilgrimages would be
continued for thirty-three and a half years. Doubtless not a few
of them hoped to establish a lasting rival to the Catholic
Church, but very soon the authorities took action and
endeavoured to suppress the whole movement. For, while it was
thus growing in Germany and the Netherlands, it had also entered
France.
At first this fatuus novus ritus was well received. As early as
1348, Pope Clement VI had permitted a similar procession in
Avignon in entreaty against the plague. Soon, however, the rapid
spread and heretical tendencies of the Flagellants, especially
among the turbulent peoples of Southern France, alarmed the
authorities. At the entreaty of the University of Paris, the
pope, after careful inquiry, condemned the movement and
prohibited the processions, by letters dated 20 Oct., 1349,
which were sent to all the bishops of France, Germany, Poland,
Sweden, and England. This condemnation coincided with a natural
reaction of public opinion, and the Flagellants, from being a
powerful menace to all settled public order, found themselves a
hunted and rapidly dwindling sect. But, though severely
stricken, the Flagellant tendency was by no means eradicated.
Throughout the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries there were
recrudescences of this and similar heresies. In Germany, about
1360, there appeared one Konrad Schmid, who called himself
Enoch, and pretended that all ecclesiastical authority was
abrogated, or rather, transferred to himself. Thousands of young
men joined him, and he was able to continue his propaganda till
1369, when the vigorous measures of the Inquisition resulted in
his suppression. Yet we still hear of trials and condemnations
of Flagellants in 1414 at Erfurt, in 1446 at Nordhausen, in 1453
at Sangerhausen, even so late as 1481 at Halberstadt. Again the
"Albati" or "Bianchi" are heard of in Provence about 1399, with
their processions of nine days, during which they beat
themselves and chanted the "Stabat Mater". At the end of the
fourteenth century, too, the great Dominican, St. Vincent
Ferrer, spread this penitential devotion throughout the north of
Spain, and crowds of devotees followed him on his missionary
pilgrimages through France, Spain, and Northern Italy.
In fact, the great outburst of 1349, while, perhaps, more
widespread and more formidable than similar fanaticisms, was but
one of a series of popular upheavals at irregular intervals from
1260 until the end of the fifteenth century. The generating
cause of these movements was always an obscure amalgam of horror
of corruption, of desire to imitate the heroic expiations of the
great penitents, of apocalyptic vision, of despair at the
prevailing corruption in Church and State. All these things are
smouldering in the minds of the much-tried populace of Central
Europe. It needed but a sufficient occasion, such as the
accumulated tyranny of some petty ruler, the horror of a great
plague, or the ardent preaching of some saintly ascetic, to set
the whole of Christendom in a blaze. Like fire the impulse ran
through the people, and like fire it died down, only to break
out here and there anew. At the beginning of each outbreak, the
effects were generally good. Enemies were reconciled, debts were
paid, prisoners were released, ill-gotten goods were restored.
But it was the merest revivalism, and, as always, the reaction
was worse than the former stagnation. Sometimes the movement was
more than suspected of being abused for political ends, more
often it exemplified the fatal tendency of emotional pietism to
degenerate into heresy. The Flagellant movement was but one of
the manias that afflicted the end of the Middle Ages; others
were the dancing-mania, the Jew-baiting rages, which the
Flagellant processions encouraged in 1349, the child-crusades,
and the like. And, according to the temperament of the peoples
among whom it spread, the movement became a revolt and a
fantastic heresy, a rush of devotion settling soon into pious
practices and good works, or a mere spectacle that aroused the
curiosity or the pity of the onlookers.
Although as a dangerous heresy the Flagellants are not heard of
after the fifteenth century, their practices were revived again
and again as a means of quite orthodox public penance. In
France, during the sixteenth century, we hear of White, Black,
Grey, and Blue Brotherhoods. At Avignon, in 1574, Catherine de'
Medici herself led a procession of Black Penitents. In Paris, in
1583, King Henry III became patron of the "Blancs Battus de
l'Annonciation". On Holy Thursday of that year he organized a
great procession from the Augustinians to Notre-Dame, in which
all the great dignitaries of the realm were obliged to take part
in company with himself. The laughter of the Parisians, however,
who treated the whole thing as a jest, obliged the king to
withdraw his patronage. Early in the seventeenth century, the
scandals arising among these brotherhoods caused the Parliament
of Paris to suppress them, and under the combined assaults of
the law, the Gallicans, and the sceptics, the practice soon died
out. Throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries
Flagellant processions and self-flagellation were encouraged by
the Jesuits in Austria and the Netherlands, as well as in the
far countries which they evangelized. India, Persia, Japan, the
Philippines, Mexico, and the States of South America, all had
their Flagellant processions; in Central and South America they
continue even to the present day, and were regulated and
restrained by Pope Leo XIII. In Italy generally and in the Tyrol
similar processions survived until the early years of the
nineteenth century; in Rome itself they took place in the Jesuit
churches as late as 1870, while even later they occurred in
parts of Tuscany and Sicily. Always, however, these later
Flagellant processions have taken place under the control of
ecclesiastical authority, and must by no means he connected with
the heretical epidemic of the later Middle Ages.
One of the best modern accounts of flagellation and the
Flagellants is an article by HAUPT, Geisselune, kirchliche, und
Geisslerbruderschaften, in Realencykl. fuer prot. Theol. It
contains full and excellent bibliographies. Some of the original
authorities for the outbreak in 1260 will be found in PERTZ,
Mon. Germ. Hist., XVII, 102-3, 105, 191, 402, 531, 714; XIX,
179. For the heresy of 1348 may be consulted: Chroniken der
deutschen Staedte, VII, 204 sqq.; IX, 105 sqq.; Forschungen zur
deutschen Geschichte, XXI (1881), 21 sqq.; Recueil des
chroniques de Flandre, II (Bruges, 1841), 111 sqq.; FREDERICQ,
Corpus documentorum inquisitionis hoereticoe pravitatis
neerlandicoe, I (Ghent, 1889), 190 sqq.; BERLIERE, Trois traites
inedits sur les Flagellants de 1349, in Revue Benedictine, July,
1908. Good accounts are to be found in MURATORI, Antiquitt.
Ital. med., oevi, VI (Milan, 1738-42), diss. lxxv; GRETSER,
Opera, IV (Ratisbon, 1734), 43-5; ZOeCKLER, Askese und
Moenchtum, II (Frankfort, 1897), 518, 530-7.
LESLIE A. ST. L. TOKE.
Flagellation
Flagellation
The history of the whip, rod, and stick, as instruments of
punishment and of voluntary penance, is a long and interesting
one. The Hebrew words for "whip" and "rod", are in etymology
closely related (Gesenius). Horace (Sat., I, iii) tells us not
to use the horribile flagellum, made of thongs of ox-hide, when
the offender deserves only the scutica of twisted parchment; the
schoolmaster's ferula -- Eng. ferule (Juvenal, Sat., I, i, 15)
-- was a strap or rod for the hand (see ferule in Skeat). The
earliest Scriptural mention of the whip is in Ex., v, 14, 16
(flagellati sunt; flagellis coedimur), where the Heb. word
meaning "to strike" is interpreted in the Greek and the Latin
texts, "were scourged" -- "beaten with whips". Roboam said (III
Kings, xii, 11, 14; II Par., x, 11, 14): "My father beat you
with whips, but I will beat you with scorpions", i. e. with
scourges armed with knots, points, etc. Even in Latin scorpio is
so interpreted by St. Isidore (Etym., v, 27), "virga nodosa vel
aculeata". Old-Testament references to the rod might be
multiplied indefinitely (Deut., xxv, 2, 3; II Kings, vii, 14;
Job, ix, 34; Prov., xxvi, 3, etc.). In the New Testament we are
told that Christ used the scourge on the money-changers (John,
ii, 15); He predicted that He and His disciples would be
scourged (Mat., x, 17; xx, 19); and St. Paul says: "Five times
did I receive forty stripes, save one. Thrice was I beaten with
rods" (II Cor., xi, 24, 25; Deut., xxv, 3; Acts, xvi, 22). The
offender was to be beaten in the presence of the judges (Deut.,
xxv, 2, 3), but was never to receive more than forty stripes. To
keep within the law, it was the practice to give only
thirty-nine. The culprit was so attached to a Low pillar that he
had to lean forward -- " they shall lay him down", says the law,
to receive the strokes. Verses of thirteen words in Hebrew were
recited, the last always being: "But he is merciful, and will
forgive their sins: and will not destroy them" [Ps. lxxvii (Heb.
lxxviii) 38]; but the words served merely to count the blows.
Moses allowed masters to use the rod on slaves; not, however, so
as to cause death (Ex., xxi, 20). The flagellation of Christ was
not a Jewish, but a Roman punishment, and was therefore
administered all the more cruelly. It was suggested by Pilate's
desire to save Him from crucifixion, and this was inflicted only
when the scourging had failed to satisfy the Jews. In Pilate's
plan flagellation was not a preparation, but rather a
substitute, for crucifixion.
As the earliest monuments of Egypt make the scourge or whip very
conspicuous, the children of Israel cannot have been the first
on whom the Egyptians used it. In Assyria the slaves dragged
their burdens under the taskmaster's lash. In Sparta even youths
of high social standing were proud of their stoical indifference
to the scourge; while at Rome the various names for slaves
(flagriones, verberones, etc.) and the significant term lorarii,
used by Plautus, give us ample assurance that the scourge was
not spared. However, from passages in Cicero and texts in the
New Testament, we gather that Roman citizens were exempt from
this punishment. The bamboo is used on all classes in China, but
in Japan heavier penalties, and frequently death itself, are
imposed upon offenders. The European country most conspicuous at
the present day for the whipping of culprits is Russia, where
the knout is more than a match for the worst scourge of the
Romans. Even in what may be called our own times, the use of the
whip on soldiers under the English flag was not unknown; and the
State of Delaware yet believes in it as a corrective and
deterrent for the criminal class. If we refer to the past, by
Statute 39 Eliz., ch. iv, evil-doers were whipped and sent back
to the place of their nativity; moreover, Star-chamber whippings
were frequent. "In Partridge's Almanack for 1692, it is stated
that Oates was whipt with a whip of six thongs, and received
2256 lashes, amounting to 13536 stripes" (A Hist. of the Rod, p.
158). He survived, however, and lived for years. The pedagogue
made free use of the birch. Orbillus, who flogged Horace, was
only one of the learned line who did not believe in moral
suasion, while Juvenal's words: "Et nos ergo manum ferulae
subduximus" (Sat., I, i, 15) show clearly the system of school
discipline existing in his day. The priests of Cybele scourged
themselves and others, and such stripes were considered sacred.
Although these and similar acts of penance, to propitiate
heaven, were practised even before the coming of Christ, it was
only in the religion established by Him that they found wise
direction and real merit. It is held by some interpreters that
St. Paul in the words: "I chastise my body" refers to
self-inflicted bodily scourging (I Cor., ix, 27). The Greek word
hypopiazo (see Liddell and Scott) means "to strike under the
eye", and metaphorically "to mortify"; consequently, it can
scarcely mean "to scourge", and indeed in Luke, xviii, 5, such
an interpretation is quite inadmissible. Furthermore, where St.
Paul certainly refers to scourging, he uses a different word. We
may therefore safely conclude that he speaks here of
mortification in general, as Piconio holds (Triplex Expositio).
Scourging was soon adopted as a sanction in the monastic
discipline of the fifth and following centuries. Early in the
fifth century it is mentioned by Palladius in the "Historia
Lausiaca" (c. vi), and Socrates (Hist. Eccl., IV, xxiii) tells
us that, instead of being excommunicated, offending young monks
were scourged. See the sixth-century rules of St. Caesarius of
Aries for nuns (P. L., LXVII, 1111), and of St. Aurelian of
Arles (ibid., LXVIII, 392, 401-02). Thenceforth scourging is
frequently mentioned in monastic rules and councils as a
preservative of discipline (Hefele, "Concilieng.", II, 594,
656). Its use as a punishment was general in the seventh century
in all monasteries of the severe Columban rule (St. Columbanus,
in "Regula Coenobialis", c. x, in P. L., LXXX, 215 sqq.); for
later centuries of the early Middle Ages see Thomassin, "Vet. ac
nova ecc. disciplina, II (3), 107; Du Cange, "Glossar. med. et
infim. latinit.", s. v. "Disciplina"; Gretser, "De spontanea
disciplinarum seu flagellorum cruce libri tres" (Ingolstadt,
1603); Kober, "Die koerperliche Zuechtigung als kirchliches
Strafmittel gegen Cleriker und Moenche" in Tueb.
"Quartalschrift" (1875). The Canon law (Decree of Gratian,
Decretals of Gregory IX) recognized it as a punishment for
ecclesiastics; even as late as the sixteenth and seventeenth
centuries, it appears in ecclesiastical legislation as a
punishment for blasphemy, concubinage, and simony. Though
doubtless at an early date a private means of penance and
mortification, such use is publicly exemplified in the tenth and
eleventh centuries by the lives of St. Dominic Loricatus (P. L.,
CXLIV, 1017) and St. Peter Damian (died 1072). The latter wrote
a special treatise in praise of self-flagellation; though blamed
by some contemporaries for excess of zeal, his example and the
high esteem in which he was held did much to popularize the
voluntary use of the scourge or "discipline" as a means of
mortification and penance. Thenceforth it is met with in most
medieval religious orders and associations. The practice was, of
course, capable of abuse, and so arose in the thirteenth century
the fanatical sect of the Flagellants, though in the same period
we meet with the private use of the "discipline" by such saintly
persons as King Louis IX and Elizabeth of Thuringia.
UNGER, Die Flagellanten (1902); COOPER (pseudonym), Flagellation
and the Flagellants, A History of the Rod, etc. (new ed.,
London, 1896), an anti-Catholic and biased work; BARNEY,
Circumcision and Flagellation among the Filipinos (Carlisle,
Pa., 1903); CALMET'S Dict. of the Bible, s. v. Scourging; KITTO,
Cyclop. of Biblical Lit., s. v. Punishment.
JOHN J. TIERNEY.
Benedict Joseph Flaget
Benedict Joseph Flaget
First Bishop of Bardstown (subsequently of Louisville),
Kentucky, U.S.A., b. at Contournat, near Billom, Auvergne,
France, 7 November, 1763; d. 11 February, 1850, at Louisville,
Kentucky. He was a posthumous child and was only two years old
when his mother died, leaving him and two brothers to the care
of an aunt; they were welcomed at the home of Canon Benoit
Flaget, their uncle, at Billom. In his seventeenth year, he went
to the Sulpician seminary of Clermont to study philosophy and
theology, and joining the Society of St. Sulpice, 1 November,
1783, he was ordained priest in 1787, at Issy, where Father
Gabriel Richard, the future apostle of Michigan, was then
superior. Flaget taught dogmatic theology at Nantes for two
years, and filled the same chair at the seminary of Angers when
that house was closed by the Revolution. He returned to Billom
in 1791 and on the advice of the Sulpician superior, Father
Emery, determined to devote himself to the American mission. He
sailed in January, 1792, with Father J. B. M. David, his future
coadjutor, and the subdeacon Stephen Badin, landing in
Baltimore, 29 March, 1792. He was studying English with his
Sulpician brethren, when Bishop Carroll tested his
self-sacrifice by sending him to Fort Vincennes, as missionary
to the Indians and pastor of the Fort. Crossing the mountains he
reached Pittsburg, where he had to tarry for six months owing to
low water in the Ohio, doing such good work that he gained the
lasting esteem of General Anthony Wayne. The latter recommended
him to the military commander Colonel Clark, at the Falls of the
Ohio, who deemed it an honour to escort him to Fort Vincennes,
where he arrived 21 December, 1792. Father Flaget stayed here
two years and then, recalled by his superiors, he became
professor at the Georgetown College under the presidency of
Father Dubourg. In November, 1798, he was sent to Havana, whence
he returned in 1801 with twenty-three students to Baltimore.
On 8 April, 1808, Bardstown, Kentucky, was created a see and
Flaget was named its first bishop. He refused the honour and his
colleagues of St. Sulpice approved his actiion, but when in 1809
he went to Paris, his superior, Father Emery, received him with
the greeting: "My Lord, you should be in your diocese! The pope
commands you to accept." Leaving France with Father Simon
William Brute, the future Bishop of Vincennes, and the
subdeacon, Guy Ignatius Chabrat, his future coadjutor in
Kentucky. Flaget landed in Baltimore, and was consecrated 4
November, 1810, by Archbishop Carroll. The Diocese of Bardstown
comprised the whole North-West, bounded East and West by
Louisiana and the Mississippi. Bishop Flaget, handicapped by
poverty, did not leave Baltimore until 11 May, 1811, and reached
Louisville, 4 June, whence the Rev. C. Nerinckx escorted him to
Bardstown. He arrived there 9 June. On Christmas of that year he
ordained priest the Rev. Guy Ignatius Chabrat, the first priest
ordained in the West. Before Easter, 1813, he had established
priestly conferences, a seminary at St. Stephen's (removed to
St. Thomas', November, 1811), and made two pastoral visits in
Kentucky. That summer he visited the outlying districts of
Indiana, Illinois, and Eastern Missouri, confirming 1275 people
during the trip.
Bishop Flaget's great experience, absolute self-denial, and holy
life gave him great influence in the councils of the Church and
at Rome. Most of the bishops appointed within the next twenty
years were selected with his advice. In October, 1817, he went
to St. Louis to prepare the way for Bishop Dubourg. He
recommended Bishop Fenwick for Ohio, then left on a trip through
that State, Indiana, and Michigan in 1818. In the latter State
he did great missionary work at Detroit and Monroe, attending
also a rally of 10,000 Indians at St. Mary's. Upon his return to
Kentucky in 1819 he consecrated his new cathedral in Bardstown,
8 August, and consecrated therein his first coadjutor bishop,
Rev. J. B. M. David, on the 15th. In 1821 he started on a
visitation of Tennessee, and bought property in Nashville for
the first Catholic church. The years 1819 to 1821 were devoted
to missionary work among the Indians. He celebrated the first
Synod of Bardstown, 8 August, 1823, and continued his labours
until 1828, when he was called to Baltimore to consecrate
Archbishop Whitfield; there he attended the first Council of
Baltimore in 1829. In 1830 he consecrated one of his own
priests, Rev. Richard Kenrick, as Bishop of Philadelphia. A
great friend of education, he invited the Jesuits to take charge
of St. Mary's College, Bardstown, in 1832. In the meantime he
had resigned his see in favour of Bishop David with Bishop
Chabrat as coadjutor. Both priests and people rebelled, and
their representations were so instant and continued that Rome
recalled its appointment and reinstated Bishop Flaget, who
during all this time was, regardless of age and infirmities,
attending the cholera-stricken in Louisville, Bardstown, and
surrounding country during 1832 and 1833. Bishop Chabrat became
his second coadjutor and was consecrated 20 July, 1834. Only
Kentucky and Tennessee were now left under Flaget's
jurisdiction, and in the former he founded various religious
institutions, including four colleges, two convents, one
foundation of brothers, and two religious institutions of
priests. Tennessee became a diocese with see at Nashville in
1838.
His only visit to Europe and Rome was not undertaken until 1835.
He spent four years in France and Italy in the interests of his
diocese and of the propogation of the Faith, visiting forty-six
dioceses. Everywhere he edified the people by the sanctity of
his life, and well authenticated miracles are ascribed to his
intercession. He returned to America in 1839, transferred his
see to Louisville, and crowned his fruitful life by
consecrating, 10 September, 1848, a young Kentucky priest,
Martin John Spalding, as his third coadjutor and successor in
the see of Louisville. The corner-stone of the cathedral of
Louisville was laid 15 August, 1849. He died peacefully at
Louisville, sincerely mourned and remembered to this day. His
only writings are his journal and a report of his diocese to the
Holy See.
Spalding, Life, Times and Character of Benedict Joseph
Flaget (Louisville, 1852); Shea, Hist. Cath. Ch. in U. S. (New
York, 1904); Webb, The Centenary of Catholicity in Kentucky
(Louisville, 1884).
Camillus P. Maes
Thomas Canon Flanagan
Thomas Canon Flanagan
Born in England in 1814, though Irish by descent; died at
Kidderminster, 21 July, 1865. He was educated at Sedgley Park
School. At the age of eighteen he proceeded to Oscott -- that is
"Old Oscott", now known as Maryvale -- to study for the
priesthood. The president at that time was Dr. Weedall, under
whose supervision the present imposing college buildings were
about to be erected. The students and professors migrated there
in 1838, after the summer vacation, Flanagan being thus one of
the original students at the new college. There he was ordained
in 1842, Bishop (afterwards Cardinal) Wiseman being then
president. At this time Oscott was the centre of much
intellectual activity, many of the Oxford converts during the
following years visiting the college, where some made their
first acquaintance with Catholic life. Flanagan, who throughout
his course had been an industrious and persevering student, was
asked by Wiseman to remain as a professor, and as such he came
into contact with the new converts, his own bent towards
historical studies creating a strong bond of sympathy between
him and those who had become convinced of the truth of
Catholicism on historical grounds.
In 1847 Flanagan brought out his first book, a small manual of
British and Irish history, containing numerous statistical
tables the preparation of which was congenial to his methodical
mind. The same year he became prefect of studies and acted
successfully in that capacity until 1850, when he was appointed
vice-president and then president of Sedgley Park School, and he
became one of the first canons of the newly formed Birmingham
Diocese in 1851. The active life of administration was, however,
not congenial to his tastes, and he was glad to resume his
former position at Oscott in 1853. It was at this time that he
began writing his chief work, a "History of the Church in
England". In order to allow him more leisure for this, he was
appointed chaplain to the Hornyold family at Blackmore Park, and
his history appeared in two volumes, during his residence there,
in 1857. It was at that time the only complete work on the
Church in England continued down to present times, and, though
marred by some inaccuracies, on the whole it bore witness to
much patient work and research on the part of the author. His
style, however, was somewhat concise, and Bishop Ullathorne's
remark, that Canon Flanagan was a compiler of history rather
than a vivid historian, has often been quoted. The year after
the appearance of his Church history, we find Flanagan once more
installed in his old position as prefect of studies at Oscott,
where he remained for eighteen months, when his health gave way.
The last years of his life were spent as assistant priest at St.
Chad's Cathedral, Birmingham. He died at Kidderminster, whither
he had gone for his health.
BERNARD WARD
Flanders
Flanders
(Flem. VLAENDEREN; Ger. FLANDEREN; Fr. FLANDRE).
Designated in the eighth century a small territory around
Bruges; it became later the name of the country bounded by the
North Sea, the Scheldt, and the Canche; in the fifteenth century
it was even used by the Italians and the Spaniards as the
synonym for the Low Countries; to-day Flanders belongs for the
most part to Belgium, comprising the provinces of East Flanders
and West Flanders. A part of it, known as French Flanders, has
gone to France, and another small portion to Holland.
Flanders is an unpicturesque lowland, whose level is scarcely
above that of the sea, which accounts for the fact that a great
part of it was for a long time flooded at high water. The
country took its present aspect only after a line of downs had
been raised by the sea along its shore. The soil of Flanders,
which for the most part was unproductive, owes its present
fertility to intelligent cultivation; its products are various,
but the most important are flax and hemp; dairying,
market-gardening, and the manufacture of linens are the main
Flemish industries. At the time of its conquest by the Romans,
Flanders was inhabited by the Morini, the Menapii, and the
Nervii. Most probably these tribes were of partly Teutonic and
partly Celtic descent, but, owing to the almost total absence of
Roman colonies and the constant influx of barbarians, the
Germanic element soon became predominant. The Flemings of to-day
may be considered as a German people whose language, a
Low-German dialect, has been very slightly, if at all,
influenced by Latin.
It is likely that Christianity was first introduced into
Flanders by Roman soldiers and merchants, but its progress must
have been very slow, for Saint Eloi (Eligius, c. 590-660) tells
us that in his days almost the whole population was still
heathen, and the conversion of the Flemings was not completed
until the beginning of the eighth century. Towards the middle of
the ninth century, the country around Bruges was governed by a
marquess or "forester" named Baldwin, whose bravery in fighting
the Northmen had won him the surname of Iron Arm. Baldwin
married Judith, daughter of the Emperor Charles the Bald, and
received from his father-in-law, with the title of count, the
country bounded by the North Sea, the Scheldt, and the Canche.
Thus was founded, in 864, the County of Flanders. Baldwin I was
a warm protector of the clergy, and made large grants of land to
churches and abbeys. He died in 878. His successors were Baldwin
II, the Bald (878-919), Arnold I (919-964), Baldwin III
(958-961), and Arnold II (964-989), who could not prevent Hugh
Capet from annexing the County of Boulogne to the royal domain
of France. The son of Arnold II, Baldwin IV, the Bearded
(989-1036), was a brave and pious prince. He received from the
Emperor Henry II the imperial castle of Ghent and its territory.
From that time there were two Flanders: Flanders under the
Crown, a French fief; and imperial Flanders, under the
suzerainty of Germany. Baldwin V, of Lille (1036-67), added to
his domains the County of Eenhan or Alost. He was regent of
France during the minority of Philip I. Baldwin VI, of Mons
(1067-70), was also Count of Hainault in consequence of his
marriage to Richilde, heiress of that county. He reigned only
three years, and was succeeded in Flanders by his brother Robert
the Friesman (1070-1093). Robert II, of Jerusalem (1093-1111),
took a leading part in the First Crusade. He annexed Tournai to
Flanders and died fighting for his suzerain. His son Baldwin
VII, Hapkin (1111-1119), enforced strict justice among the
nobility. Like his father, he died while supporting the cause of
his suzerain. His successor was Charles, son of Saint Canute of
Denmark (1119-27). The new count was a saintly prince and a
great lover of peace. His stern justice, however, angered a few
greedy nobles, who murdered him while he was praying in the
church of Saint-Donat in Bruges. Louis VI, King of France, then
gave the County of Flanders to William of Normandy, a grandson
of the Conqueror, but William's high-handed way of governing the
country soon made him unpopular and the Flemings turned to
Thierry of Alsace, a descendant of Robert I. William died in the
war which ensued, and Thierry's candidacy received the royal
sanction. Thierry (1128-68) granted privileges to the Flemish
communes, whose origin dates from this period, and took part in
the Second Crusade. His son Philip (1168-91) granted new
privileges to the communes, did much to foster commerce and
industry, and was a generous protector of poets. He made a
political blunder when he gave up Artois to France as the dowry
of his niece, as this dismemberment of the county led to many
wars with the latter country. Philip died in the Holy Land
during the Third Crusade. His successor was his brother-in-law,
Baldwin VIII, the Bold, of Hainault (1191-95). Baldwin IX
(1195-1205) is famous in history as the first Latin Emperor of
Constantinople. He died in 1205 in a war against the Bulgarians,
and the Counties of Flanders and Hainault passed to his daughter
Jeanne, who had married Ferdinand of Portugal. This prince was
involved in the war of King John of England against Philip II of
France, and was made a prisoner at the battle of Bouvines
(1214). He was released in 1228, only to die shortly afterwards.
Jeanne (1205-1244) administered the counties wisely during her
husband's captivity, and after his death she increased the
liberties of the communes to counteract the influence of the
nobility--a policy which was followed by her sister Margaret,
who succeeded her in 1244. Upon Margaret's death, in 1279, her
children by her first husband (Bouchard d'Avesnes) inherited
Hainault, while Flanders went to the Dampierres, her children by
her second husband.
The battle of Bouvines was the beginning of a new era in the
history of Flanders. Up to that time the counts had occupied the
foreground; their place was henceforth taken by the communes,
whose power reaches its acme in the course of the thirteenth
century. Bruges, the Venice of the North, had then a population
of more than 200,000 inhabitants; its fairs were the meeting
place of the merchants of all Europe; Ghent and Ypres had each
more than 50,000 men engaged in the cloth industry. This
commercial and industrial activity, in which the rural classes
had their share, brought to Flanders a wealth which manifested
itself everywhere--in the buildings, in the fare of the
inhabitants, in their dress. "I thought I was the only queen
here," said the wife of Philip the Fair on a visit to Bruges,
"but I see hundreds of queens around me." The intellectual and
artistic activity of the time was no less remarkable. Then
flourished Henry of Ghent, the Solemn Doctor; Van Maerlant, the
great Flemish poet, and his continuator, Louis van Velthem;
Philip Mussche, the chronicler, who became Bishop of Tournai;
and the mystic Jan van Ruysbroeck. Then, too, were built the
beautiful guild-halls, city-halls, and churches, which bear
witness at once to the popular love for the fine arts and
Flemish religious zeal-the guild-halls of Bruges and Ypres, the
churches of the Holy Saviour and of Our Lady at Bruges, those of
Saint-Bavon, Saint-Jacques and Saint-Nicolas at Ghent, and of
Saint-Martin at Ypres. Still more worthy of admiration was the
internal organization of the communes, which, owing to the
beneficent influence of the Church, had become so powerful a
factor in the moral welfare of the masses. Guy of Dampierre
(1279-1305) succeeded his mother Margaret, and inaugurated a new
policy in the administration of the county. His predecessors had
on the whole been friendly to the wealthy classes in the Flemish
cities, in whose hands were the most important offices of the
communes. Guy, who aimed at absolute rule, sought the support of
the guilds in his conflict with the rich. The latter appealed
from his decisions to the King of France, the wily Philip the
Fair, who readily seized upon this opportunity of weakening the
power of his most important vassal. Philip constantly ruled
against the count, who finally appealed to arms, but was
defeated. Flanders then received a French governor, but the
tyranny of the French soon brought about an insurrection, in the
course of which some 3000 French were slaughtered in Bruges, and
at the call of the two patriots, de Coninck and Breydel, the
whole country rose in arms. Philip sent into Flanders a powerful
army, which met with a crushing defeat at Courtrai (1302); after
another battle, which remained undecided, the King of France
resorted to diplomacy, but in vain, and peace was restored only
in 1320, after Pope John XXII had induced the Flemings to accept
it. Guy of Dampierre, who died in prison in 1305, was succeeded
by his son Robert of Bethune, who had an uneventful reign of
seventeen years. The successor of the latter was his grandson,
Louis of Nevers (1322-1346), who was unfit for the government of
Flanders on account of the French education he had received.
Shortly after his accession, the whole country was involved in a
civil war, which ended only after the Flemings had been defeated
at Cassel by the King of France (1328).
At the breaking out of the Hundred Years War, the Flemish
communes, whose prosperity depended on English wool, followed
the advice of Ghent's great citizen, Jacques van Artevelde, and
remained neutral; the count and nobility took the part of the
French king. When the policy of neutrality could no longer be
adhered to, the Flemings sided with the English and helped them
to win the battle of Sluis (1340). By that time Van Artevelde
had become practically master of the country, which was very
prosperous under his rule. He was murdered in 1345, and Louis of
Nevers was killed the next year at the battle of Crecy. His son
Louis of Male (1346-1384) was a spendthrift. The communes paid
his debts several times, but they finally refused to give him
any more money. He managed, however, to get some from Bruges by
granting to that city a licence to build a canal, which Ghent
considered a menace to her commerce. A new civil war broke out
between the two cities, and peace was not restored until Charles
VI of France had defeated the insurgents at Roosebeke (1382).
Louis of Male's successor was his son-in-law, Philip the Bold,
Duke of Burgundy (1384-1404). This prince and his son, John the
Fearless (1404-1419), being mostly interested in the affairs of
France, paid little attention to those of Flanders.
The situation changed after Philip the Good, third Duke of
Burgundy (1419-1467), had united under his rule the whole of the
Low Countries. Philip wanted to weaken the power of the communes
for the benefit of the central government, and soon picked a
quarrel with Bruges, which was compelled to surrender some of
its privileges. Ghent's turn came next. A contention had arisen
between that city and the duke over a question of taxes. War
broke out, and the army of Ghent was utterly defeated at Gavre
(1452), which city had to pay a heavy fine and to surrender her
privileges. In 1446, Philip created the Great Council of
Flanders, which, under Charles the Bold, became the Great
Council of Mechlin. Appeals from the judgments of local courts
were henceforth to be made to this council, not to the
Parliament of Paris as before. Thus were severed the bonds of
vassalage which for six centuries had connected Flanders to
France. Philip was succeeded by Charles the Bold (1467-1477),
the marriage of whose daughter to Maximilian, Archduke of
Austria, brought Flanders with the rest of the Low Countries
under the rule of the House of Hapsburg in 1477. In 1488, the
communes tried to recover their independence. The attempt was
unsuccessful, and the war was disastrous for Bruges, because it
hastened her approaching decline. The main causes of this
decline were: the silting up of her harbour, which became
inaccessible to large vessels; the discovery of America, which
opened new fields for European enterprise; the dissolution of
the Flemish Hanse, whose seat was in Bruges; the unintelligent
policy of the dukes towards England; and the civil wars of the
preceding fifty years. The prosperity of Bruges passed to
Antwerp. The reign of the House of Burgundy, in many respects so
harmful to Flanders, was a period of artistic splendour. To that
time belong Memling and the Van Eycks, the first representatives
of the Flemish school of painters. Flemish literature on the
whole declined, but a Fleming, Philippe de Comines, was the
leading French writer of the fifteenth century. Another Fleming
of that time, Thierry Maertens of Alost, was the Gutenberg of
the Low Countries. Flanders can also claim two of the greatest
scientists of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries: Simon
Stevin, mathematician and engineer, and the Jesuit Father
Gregoire de Saint-Vincent, whom Leibniz considered the equal of
Descartes.
Although the material condition of Flanders is today very
satisfactory, the country has not recovered its former
prosperity. And it is not likely that it ever will, not because
of any decrease in the energy of the Flemish race, but because
economic conditions have changed. Intellectually the Flemings of
the twentieth century are still the true sons of the glorious
generations which produced Van Maerlant, Van Artevelde, Rubens,
and Van Dyck; perhaps it is not an exaggeration to say that they
have taken the lead in promoting the prosperity of Belgium. The
Flemish tongue, which during the eighteenth century had fallen
so low that in 1830 it was little more than a patois, has risen
again to the rank of a literary language and can claim the
larger portion of the literary production of Belgium in the last
seventy-five years; nay, the Flemings have even made important
contributions to French literature. In the fine arts, in the
sciences, in politics, their activity is no less remarkable.
They have given the Belgian Parliament some of its best orators
and its ablest statesmen: Malou, Jacobs, Woeste, Beernaert,
Schollaert. Above all they have retained, as the most precious
inheritance of the past ages, the simple, fervent, vigorous
faith of the crusaders and their filial attitude towards the
Church. No country sends out a larger proportion of secular and
regular missionaries, some of whom (like Father P. J. De Smet,
the apostle of the American Indians) have attained a world-wide
celebrity. Flanders may, indeed, be considered the bulwark of
Catholicism in Belgium. The Socialists are well aware of this
fact, but the Catholics realize it just as clearly, and their
defence is equal to the enemy's attack. Every Flemish community
has its parochial schools; the Catholic press is equal to its
task; and the "Volk" of Ghent has been organized to counteract
the evil influence of the Socialist "Voruit".
KERVYN DE LETTENHOVE, Hist. de Flandre (Brussels, 1848-50); MOKE
AND HUBERT, Hist. de Belgique (Brussels, 1895); KURTH, Origines
de la Civilisation Moderne (Brussels, 1886); HYMANS, Histoire
parlementaire de la Belgique (Brussels, 1877-1906).
P.J. MARIQUE
Jean-Hippolyte Flandrin
Jean-Hippolyte Flandrin
French painter, b. at Lyons, 23 March, 1809; d. at Rome, 21
March, 1864. He came of a family of poor artisans and was a
pupil of the sculptor Legendre and of Revoil. In his education,
however, two elements must above all be taken into account. The
first is the Lyonnaise genius. Various causes, physical and
historical, have combined to give the city of Lyons a character
all its own. This is twofold -- religious and democratic -- and
the labouring classes have always been an active centre of
idealism. This is especially noticeable in its poets, from
Maurice Sceve to Lamartine. Lyons has also always been the great
entrepot for Italy, and the province was a permanent centre of
Roman culture. The second factor in Flandrin's development was
the influence of Ingres, without which it is doubtful whether
Flandrin would have achieved any fame. In 1829 Flandrin, with
his brother Jean-Paul (the landscape painter), went to Paris,
where he became a pupil of Ingres, who conceived a paternal
affection for him. In Paris the young man experienced the
bitterest trials. He was often without a fire, sometimes without
bread, but he was sustained by a quiet but unshakable faith, and
finally (1832) carried off the Grand Prix de Rome through "The
Recognition of Theseus by his Father". At Rome, where, after
1834, Ingres was director of the French Academy, his talents
expanded and blossomed under the influence of natural beauty, a
mild climate, and the noble spectacle of the works of classic
and Christian antiquities. He sent thence to the French salons:
"Dante and Virgil" (Lyons Museum, 1835); "Euripides" (Lyons
Museum, 1835); "St. Clare Healing the Blind" (Cathedral of
Nantes, 1836); "Christ Blessing the Children" (Lisieux Museum,
1837). The serenity of his nature, his chaste sense of form and
beauty, his taste for effective disposition of details, his
moral elevation, and profound piety, found expression in these
early efforts. On his return to Paris, in 1838, he was all
intent upon producing great religious works.
At this time there sprang up throughout the French School a
powerful reaction against "useless pictures", against the
conventional canvases exhibited since the end of the eighteenth
century (Quatremere de Quincy, "Notices historiques", Paris,
1834, 311). There was a return to an art more expressive of
life, less arbitrary, more mural and decorative. Delacroix,
Chasseriau, and the aged Ingres were engaged on mural paintings.
It was above all, however, the walls of the churches which
offered an infinite field to the decorators, to Chasseriau,
Victor Mottez, Couture, and Amaury Duval. Within fifteen or
twenty years this great pictorial movement, all too obscure,
left on the walls of the public buildings and churches of Paris
pictorial treasures such as had not been seen since the age of
Giotto. It is possible, and even probable that the first impulse
towards this movement (especially so far as religious paintings
are concerned) was due to the Nazarene School. Ingres had known
Overbeck and Steinle at Rome; Flandrin may well have known them.
In any case it is these artists whom he resembles above all in
purity of sentiment and profound conviction, though he possessed
a better artistic education. From 1840 his work is scarcely more
than a painstaking revival of religious painting. The artist
made it his mission in France to serve art more brilliantly than
ever, for the glory of God, and to make beauty, as of old, a
source of instruction and an instrument of edification to the
great body of the faithful. He found a sort of apostolate before
him. He was one of the petits predicateurs de l'Evangile.
Artistic productions in the mid-nineteenth century, as in the
Middle Ages, became the Biblia Pauperum.
Henceforth Flandrin's life was passed almost entirely in
churches, hovering between heaven and earth on his ladders and
scaffolds. His first work in Paris was in the chapel of St-Jean
in the church of St-Severin. He next decorated the sanctuary and
choir of the church of St-Germain-des-Pres (1842-48). On either
side of the sanctuary he painted "Christ's Entry into Jerusalem"
and "The Journey to Calvary", besides the figures of the
Apostles and the symbols of the Evangelists. All these are on a
gold background with beautiful arabesques which recall the
mosaic of Torriti at Santa Maria Maggiore. At St. Paul, Nimes
(1847-49), he painted a lovely garland of virgin martyrs, a
prelude to his masterpiece, the frieze in the nave of the church
of St-Vincent-de-Paul in Paris. The last is a double procession,
developing symmetrically between the two superimposed arches,
without any exaggeration, a Christian Panathenaea, as it was
called by Theophile Gautier. It might be shown how the ancient
Greek theme is subjected, in the work of the modern painter, to
a more flexible, less uniform, and more complex rhythm, how the
melodic procession, without losing any of its grandeur or its
continuity, is strengthened by silences, pauses, cadences. But
it is more important to note the originality in the return to
the most authentic sources of Christian iconography. Hitherto
painters of this class hardly went back beyond the fourteenth or
fifteenth century. But Flandrin turned to the first centuries of
the Church, and drew his inspiration from the very fathers of
religious thought. In the frieze of St-Vincent-de-Paul fifteen
centuries of Christian tradition are unrolled. In 1855 the
artist executed a new work in the apse of the church of Ainay
near Lyons. On his return he undertook his crowning work, the
decoration of the nave of St-Germain-des-Pres. He determined to
illustrate the life of Christ, not from an historical, but from
a theological, point of view, the point of view of eternity. He
dealt less with facts than with ideas. His tendency to
parallelism, to symmetry, found its element in the symbolism of
the Middle Ages. He took pleasure in considering, according to
this system of harmony and relations, the Old Testament as the
prototype of the New, the burning bush as representing the
Annunciation, and the baptism of Christ as prefiguring the
crossing of the Red Sea.
It was, perhaps, the first time since the frescoes of Perugino
and Botticelli in the Sistine Chapel, that Christian art
returned to its ancient genius. The interrupted tradition was
renewed after three centuries of the Renaissance. Unhappily the
form, despite its sustained beauty, possesses little
originality. It is lacking in personality. The whole series,
though exhibiting a high degree of learning and poise, of grace,
and even of strength, lacks charm and life. The colouring is
flat, crude, and dull, the design neutral, unaccented, and
commonplace. It is a miracle of spiritual power that the
seriousness of thought, the truth of sentiment, more harsh in
the Old Testament, and more tender in the Christian, scenes,
glow through this pedantic and poor style. Certain scenes, such
as "The Nativity", which strongly recalls that of Giotto at
Padua, possess a sweetness which is quite human in their
conventional reserve. Others, such as "Adam and Eve after the
Fall", and "The Confusion of Tongues", are marked by real
grandeur. This was Flandrin's last work. He was preparing a
"Last Judgment" for the cathedral of Strasburg, when he went to
Rome, where he died.
Apart from his religious work, Flandrin is the author of some
very charming portraits. In this branch of painting he is far
from possessing the acute and powerful sense of life of which
Ingres possessed the secret. Nevertheless, pictures such as the
"Young Girl with a Pink", and the "Young Girl Reading", of the
Louvre, will always be admired. Nothing could be more maidenly
and yet profound. His portraits of men are at times magnificent.
Thus in the "Napoleon III" of the Versailles Museum the pale
massive countenance of Caesar and his dream-troubled eyes reveal
the impress of destiny. An admirable "Study of a Man" in the
Museum of the Louvre, is quite "Ingresque" in its perfection,
being almost equal to that master's Oedipus. What was lacking to
the pupil in order that the artistic side of his work should
equal its merits from the religious and philosophic side was the
power of always painting in the style displayed in this
portrait.
DELABORDE, Lettres et pensees d'Hippolyte Flandrin (Paris,
1865); BLANC, Artistes de mon temps (Paris, 18--), 263; Gazette
des Beaux-Arts, XVII (1864), 105, 243; XVIII (1865), 63, 187;
XXIV (1868), 20; GAUTIER, Les Beaux-Arts en Europe, 1855, I,
283; MAURICE HAMEL in Musee d'art, Paris, no date, II, 86.
LOUIS GILLET
Flathead Indians
Flathead Indians
A name used in both Americas, without special ethnologic
significance, to designate tribes practising the custom of
compressing the skull in infancy by artificial means. Curiously
enough the tribe best known under this name, the Salish or
Flathead proper of Western Montana, never practised the custom,
the confusion arising from the fact that the early traders felt
compelled to adopt the local Indian classification, which
considered the prevailing compressed skull of the neighbouring
tribes as pointed and the naturally shaped Salish skull by
contrast as flat. The Salish or Flathead Indians of the mountain
region of north-western Montana are the easternmost tribe of the
great Salishan stock which occupied much of the Columbia and
Fraser River region westward to the Pacific. Although never a
large tribe, they have always maintained an exceptional
reputation for bravery, honesty, and general high character and
for their friendly disposition towards the whites. When first
known, about the beginning of the last century, they subsisted
chiefly by hunting and the gathering of wild roots, particularly
camas, dwelt in skin tipis or mat-covered lodges, and were at
peace with all tribes excepting their hereditary enemies, the
powerful Blackfeet. Their religion was the ordinary animism of
the Indians and they had a number of ceremonial dances,
apparently including the Sun Dance. Having learned through the
Catholic Iroquois of the Hudson Bay Company something of the
Catholic religion, they voluntarily adopted its simpler forms
and prayers, and in 1831 sent a delegation all the long and
dangerous way to St. Louis to ask of the resident government
Indian superintendent that missionaries be sent to them. This
was not then possible and other delegations were sent, until in
1840 the noted Jesuit Father Pierre De Smet (q.v.) responded and
was welcomed on his arrival in their country by a great
gathering of some 1600 Indians of the allied mountain tribes. In
1841 he founded on Bitter Root river the mission of St. Mary,
which was abandoned in 1850, in consequence of the inroads of
the Blackfeet, for the new mission of St. Ignatius on Flathead
Lake. This still exists in successful operation, practically all
the confederated Indians of the reservation-Flathead, Pend
d'Oreille, Kutenai, and Spokan-having been consistent Catholics
for half a century.
In 1855 the Flatheads made a treaty ceding most of their
territory, but retaining a considerable reservation south of
Flathead Lake and including the mission. They number now about
620, the confederated body together numbering 2200 souls, being
one of the few Indian communities actually increasing in
population. They are prosperous and industrious farmers and
stockmen, moral, devoted Catholics, and in every way a testimony
to the zeal and ability of their religious teachers, among whom,
besides De Smet, may be named such distinguished Jesuit priests
and scholars as Canestrelli, Giorda, Mengarini, Point, and
Ravalli, several of whom have made important contributions to
Salishan philology. The mission is (1908) in charge of Rev. L.
Tallman, assisted by several Jesuits, together with a number of
Christian Brothers, Sisters of providence, and Ursulines.
Director's Report of the Bureau of Catholic Ind. Missions
(Washington, 1906); CLARK, The Indian Sign Language
(Philadelphia, 1885); RONAN, Sketch of the Flathead Nation
(Helena, Mont., 1890); SHEA, Hist. of the Catholic Missions,
etc. (New York, 1854); DE SMET, Oregon Missions (New York,
1847); IDEM, Western Missions and Missionaries (New York, 1863);
STEVENS in Rept. of Com. of Ind. Affairs (Washington, 1854);
O'CONNOR, The Fladhead Indians in Records of The Am. Cath. Hist.
Soc. (Philadelphia, 1888), III, 85-110; POST, Worship Among the
Flatheads and Kaliopels in The Messenger (New York, 1894),
528-29.
JAMES MOONEY
Ven. Mathew Flathers
Ven. Mathew Flathers
(Alias Major).
An English priest and martyr; b. probably c. 1580 at Weston,
Yorkshire, England; d. at York, 21 March, 1607. He was educated
at Douai, and ordained at Arras, 25 March, 1606. Three months
later he was sent to English mission, but was discovered almost
immediately by the emissaries of the Government, who, after the
Gunpowder Plot, had redoubled their vigilance in hunting down
the priests of the proscribed religion. He was brought to trial,
under the statute of 27 Elizabeth, on the charge of receiving
orders abroad, and condemned to death. By an act of unusual
clemency, this sentence was commuted to banishment for life; but
after a brief exile, the undaunted priest returned to England in
order to fulfil his mission, and, after ministering for a short
time to his oppressed coreligionists in Yorkshire was again
apprehended. Brought to trial at York on the charge of being
ordained abroad and exercising priestly functions in England,
Flathers was offered his life on condition that he take the
recently enacted Oath of Allegiance. On his refusal, he was
condemned to death and taken to the common place of execution
outside Micklegate Bar, York. The usual punishment of hanging,
drawing, and quatering seems to have been carried out in a
peculiarly brutal manner, and eyewitnesses relate how the tragic
spectacle excited the commiseration of the crowds of Protestant
spectators.
H.G. WINTERSGILL
Flavia Domitilla
Flavia Domitilla
A Christian Roman matron of the imperial family who lived
towards the close of the first century. She was the third of
three persons (mother, daughter, and grand-daughter) who bore
the same name. The first of these was the wife of the Emperor
Vespasian; the second was his daughter and sister to the
Emperors Titus artd Dornitian; her daughter, the third
Domitilla, married her mother's first cousin to Titus Flavius
Clemens, a nephew of the Emperor Vespasian and first cousin to
Titan and Domitian. From this union there were born two sons,
who, while children, were adopted as his successors by Domitian
and commanded to assume the names Vespasianus and Domitianus. It
is quite probable that these two lads had been brought up as
Christians by their pious mother, and the possibility thus
presents itself that two Christian boys at the end of the first
century were designated for the imperial purple in Rome. Their
later fate is not known, as the Flavian line ended with
Domitian. Clement, their father, was the emperor's colleague in
the consular dignity, but had no sooner laid down his office
than he was tried on charges of the most trivial character (ex
tenuissima suspicione -- Suetonius, Vita Domit.). Dio Cassius
(lxvii, 14) says that husband and wife alike were guilty of
atheism and practice of Jewish rites and customs. Such
accusations, as is clear from the works of the Christian
apologists, could have meant nothing else than that both had
become Christians. Though doubts have been expressed, because of
the silence of Christian tradition on the subject, as to whether
Clement was a Christian, the affirmative view is considerably
strengthened by the further accusation of Suetonius that he was
a man of the most contemptible inactivity (contemptissimae
inertiae). Such charge is easily explained on the ground that
Clement found most of the duties of his office as consul so
incompatible with Christian faith and practice as to render
total abstention from public life almost an absolute necessity.
In the case of Domitilla no doubt can remain, since De Rossi
showed that the "Coemeterium Domitillae" (see EARLY CHRISTIAN
CEMETERIES) was situated on ground belonging to the Flavia
Domitilla who was banished for her faith, and that it was used
as a Christian burial place as early as the first century. As a
result of the accusations made against them Clement was put to
death, and Flavia Domitilla was banished to the island of
Pandataria in the Tyrrhenian Sea. Eusebius (H.E., III, 18;
Chron. ad an. Abrahami, 2110), the spurious acts of Nereus and
Achilles, and St. Jerome (Ep., CVIII, 7) represent Flavia
Domitilla as the niece, not the wife ot the consul Flavius
Clemens, and say that her place of exile was Pontia, an island
also situated in the Tyrrrhenian Sea. These statements have
given rise to the opinion that there were two Domitillas (aunt
and niece) who were Christians, and latter generally referred to
as Flavia Domitilla the Younger. Lightfoot has shown that this
opinion, adopted by Tillemont and De Rossi and still maintained
by many writers (among them Allard and Duchesne), is derived
entirely from Eusebius who was led into this error by mistakes
in transcription, or ambiguity of expression, in the sources
which he used.
P.J. HEALY
St. Flavian
St. Flavian
Bishop of Constantinople, date of birth unknown; d. at Hypaepa
in Lydia, August, 449. Nothing is known of him before his
elevation to the episcopate save that he was a presbyter and
skeuophylax or sacristan, of the Church of Constantinople, and
noted for the holiness of his life. His succession to St.
Proclus as bishop was in opposition to the wishes of the eunuch
Chrysaphius minister of Emperor Theodosius, who sought to bring
him into imperial disfavour. He persuaded the emperor to require
of the new bishop certain eulogiae on the occasion of his
appointment, but scornfully rejected the proffered blessed bread
on the plea that the emperor desired gifts of gold. Flavian's
intrepid refusal, on the ground of the impropriety of thus
disposing of church the treasures, aroused considerable enmity
against him. Pulcheria, the emperor's sister, being Flavian's
staunch advocate Chrysaphius secured the support of the Empress
Eudocia. Although their first efforts to involve St. Flavian in
disgrace miscarried, an opportunity soon presented itself. At a
council of bishops convened at Constantinople by Flavian, 8
Nov., 448, to settle a dispute which had arisen among his
clergy, the the archimandrite Eutyches, who was a relation of
Chrysaphius was accused of heresy by Eusebius of Dorylaeum. (For
the proceedings of the council see EUSEBIUS OF DORYLAEUM;
EUTYCHES.) Flavian exercised clemency and urged moderation, but
in the end the refusal of Eutyches to make an orthodox
declaration on the two natures of Christ forced Flavian to
pronounce the sentence of degradation and excommunication. He
forwarded a full report of the council to Pope Leo I, who in
turn gave his approval to Flavian's decision (21 May, 449) and
the following month (13 June) sent him his famous "Dogmatic
Letter". Eutyches' complaint that justice had been violated in
the council and that the Acts had been tampered with resulted in
an imperial order for the revision of Acts, executed (8 and 27
April, 449). No materior could be established, and Flavian was
justified.
The long-standing rivalry between Alexandria and Constantinoble
now became a strong factor in the dissensions. It had been none
the less keen since the See of Constantinoble had been
officially declared next in dignity to Rome, and Dioscurus,
Bishop of Alexandria, was quite ready to join forces with
Eutyches against Flavian. Even before the revision of the Acts
of Flavian's council, Chrysaphius had persuaded the emperor of
the necessity for an oecumenical council to adjust matters, and
the decree went forth that one should convene at Ephesus under
the presidency of Dioscurus, who also controlled the attendance
of bishops, Flavian and six bishops who had assisted at the
previous synod were allowed no voice, being, as it were, on
trial. (For a full account of the proceedings see EPHESUS,
ROBBER COUNCIL OF). Eutyches was absolved of heresy, and despite
the protest of the papal legate Hilary (later pope), who by his
Contradicitur annulled the decisions of the council, Flavian was
condemned and deposed. In the violent scenes which ensued he was
so ill-used that three days later he died in his place of exile.
Anatolius, a partisan of Dioscurus, was appointed to succeed
him.
St. Flavian was repeatedly vindicated by Pope Leo, whose epistle
of commendation failed to reach him before his death. The pope
also wrote in his favour to Theodosius, Pulcheria, and the
clergy of Constantinople, besides convening a council at Rome,
wherein he designated the Council of Ephesus Ephecinum non
judicium sed latrocinium. At the council of Chalcedon (451) the
Acts of the Robber Council were annulled and Flavian eulogized
as a martyr for the Faith. Pope Hilary had Flavian's death
represented pictorially in a Roman church erected by him. On
Pulcheria's accession to power, after the death of Theodosius,
she brought the remains of her friend to Constantinople where
they were received in triumph and interred with those of his
predecessors in the see. In the Greek Menology and the Roman
Martyrology his feast is entered 18 February, the anniversary of
the translation of his body. Relics of St. Flavian are honoured
in Italy.
St. Flavian's appeal to Pope Leo against the Robber Council has
been published by Amelli in his work "S. Leone Magno e
l'Oriente" (Monte Cassino, 1890), also by Lacey (Cambridge,
1903). Two other (Greek and Latin) letters to Leo are preserved
in Migne, P.L. (LIV, 723-32, 743-51), and one to Emperor
Theodosius also in Migne, P.G. (LXV, 889-92).
F.M. RUDGE
Flavias
Flavias
A titular see of Cilicia Secunda. Nothing is known of its
ancient name and history, except that it is said to be identical
with Sis. Lequien (II, 899) gives the names of several of its
bishops: Alexander, later Bishop of Jerusalem and founder of the
famous library of the Holy Sepulchre in the third century;
Nicetas, present at the Council of Nicaea (325); John, who lived
in 451; Andrew in the sixth century; George (681); and
Eustratus, Patriarch of Antioch about 868. If the identification
of Flavias with Sis, which is probable, be admitted, it will be
found that it is first mentioned in Theodoret's life of St.
Simeon Stylites.
In 704 the Arabs laid siege to the stronghold of Sis. From 1186
till 1375 the city was the capital of the Kings of Lesser
Armenia. In 1266 it was captured and burned by the Egyptians.
Definitely conquered by the latter in 1375, it passed later into
the power of the Ottomans. In the Middle Ages it was the
religious centre of Christian Armenians, at least until the
catholicos established himself at Etschmiadzin. Sis is still the
residence of an Armenian catholicos who has under his
jurisdiction several bishops, numerous villages and convents. It
is the chief town of the caza of the same name in the vilayet of
Adana and numbers 4000 inhabitants, most of whom are Armenians.
The great heats compel the inhabitants to desert it during the
summer months. It is surrounded by vineyards and groves of
cypress and sycamore trees. Ruins of churches, convents, castles
and palaces may be seen on all sides.
S. VAILHE
Abbey of Flavigny
Abbey of Flavigny
A Benedictine abbey in the Diocese of Dijon, the department of
Cote-d'Or, and arroundissement of Semur. This monastery was
founded in 721, the first year of the reign of Thierry IV, by
Widerad, who richly endowed it. According to the authors of the
"Gallia Christiana" the new abbey, placed under the patronage of
St. Prix, Bishop of Clermont, and martyr, was erected on the
site of an ancient monastic foundation, dating, it is said, from
the time of Clovis, and formerly under the patronage of St.
Peter. This titular eventually overshadowed and superseded St.
Prix. Pope John VIII dedicated the new church about the year
877, from which time the first patronage, that of St. Peter,
appears to have prevailed definitively. The fame of Flavigny was
due partly to the relics which it preserved, and partly to the
piety of its religious. The monastery was at the height of its
reputation in the eighth century, in the time of the Abbot
Manasses, whom Charlemagne authorized to found the monastery of
Corbigny. The same Manasses transferred from Volvic to Flavigny
the relics of St. Prix. There were also preserved here the
relics of St. Regina, whom her acts represent as having been
beheaded for the faith in the borough of Alise (since called
Alise-Sainte-Reine). The history of the translation of St.
Regina (21-22 March, 864) was the subject of a contemporary
account. Unfortunately the "Chronicle", the "Martyrology", and
the "Necrology" of the Abbot Hugues, and the "Livre contenant
les choses notables" have either perished or contain few facts
of real interest. The liturgical books, notably the
"Lectionary", have disappeared. The abbatial list contains few
names worthy to be preserved, with the exception of that of
Hugues of Flavigny. The monastery was rebuilt in the seventeenth
century and occupied by Benedictines of the Congregation of St.
Maur, who were actively employed in research concerning the
historical documents of the abbey, but it disappeared during the
French Revolution. Hitherto it had formed a part of the Diocese
of Autun; but after the concordat of 1802 the new partition of
the diocese placed Flavigny in the Diocese of Dijon. Lacordaire
rebuilt and restored all that remained of the monastery
surrounded by a portion of its ancient estate, and established
there a convent of the order of St. Dominic.
H. LECLERCQ
Flaviopolis
Flaviopolis
A titular see in the province of Honorias. The city, formerly
called Cratia, originally belonged to Bithynia (Ptolemy, V, i,
14), but was later attached to Honorias by Justinian (Novella
xxix). Under Constantine the Great it received the name of
Flaviopolis. No less than ten of its bishops are known from 343
to 869 (Lequien, I, 575-78). One of them, Paul, was the friend
and defender of St. John Chrysostom. The most noted was St.
Abraham, bishop in the sixth century, whose life has recently
been published (Vailhe, "Saint Abraham de Cratia" in "Echos
d'Orient", VIII, 290-94). The diocese was still in existence in
the twelfth century. Flaviopolis, now known as Guerede, is a
caza situated in the sanjak of Bolou, and the vilayet of
Castamouni. Its 4000 inhabitants, are nearly all Mussulmans;
there are only 200 Christians, 40 of whom are Armenian
Catholics. A small river, the Oulou Sou, irrigates the very
fertile country. Fruit trees (peach, apricot, and cherry) grow
there in great abundance.
S. VAILHE
Esprit Flechier
Esprit Flechier
Bishop; b. at Pernes, France, 1632; died at Montpellier, 1710;
member of the Academy, and together with Bourdaloue, Bossuet,
Fenelon, and Mascaron, one of the greatest sacred orators of his
century; his earliest studies were made at Tarascon, under the
guidance of his uncle, who was superior of a religious
congregation. He himself entered this congregation where he
received holy orders, but soon left it and went to Paris in
1660. It was not long before he acquired a reputation as a wit
and spiritual writer. A Latin poem in honour of Louis XIV first
won for him the favour of the Court. He devoted to literature
and history the leisure which remained after the fulfilment of
his duties as tutor in the household of Caumartin. Councillor of
State, and it was then he wrote his chief historical work
"Memoires sur les grands jours tenus a Clermont en 1665". He was
tutor to the Dauphin when his preaching began to make him
famous. His funeral eulogies in particular won for him rnore
than one comparison with Bossuet. It happened that on a number
of occasions he had to treat the same subjects as the Bishop of
Meaux, for instance the funeral oration of Maria Theresa, and to
arouse almost the same sentiments of admiration.
He was received a member of the French Academy in 1673, on the
same day as Racine. Having been consecrated bishop in 1685, he
left the See of Lavaur for that of Nimes in 1687. During his
administration he was remarkable for his great charity and his
zeal in converting Protestants, but this did not prevent him
from devoting himself to letters and to making the Academy of
Nimes, of which he was the director, shine with particular
brilliancy. He was less a preacher of the Gospel than a
remarkable panegyrist. His sermons are as different from those
of Bourdaloue orator than a severe moralist and humble preacher.
He delighted ingenious turns of phrase, sonorous words and
pretentious periods which have the appearance of seeking
applause and which are hardly in accord with the spirit of the
Gospel. His funeral oration for Turenne is in every classical
handbook. His oratorical works have been collected under the
title of "Oraisons Funebres" (Paris, 1878), "Sermons", and
"Panegyriques". In history he has left an "Histoire du Cardinal
Ximenes" (Paris, 1693), the "Vie de Theodose le Grand" and
"Lettres choisies sur divers sujet". The last edition of the
"Oeuvres" of Flechier is in two volumes (Paris, 1886).
LOUIS LALANDE
Bertholet Flemael
Bertholet Flemael
(The name was also spelled FLEMALLE and FLAMAEL).
Painter, b. at Liege, Flanders, in 1614; d. there in 1675. The
son of a glass painter, he was instructed in his art by Trippez
and Douffet successively. He visited Rome in 1638 was invited by
the Duke of Tuscany to Florence and employed in decorating one
of his galleries, thence he passed to Paris where he carried out
some elaborate decorative work at Versailles and painted for the
sacristy of the church of the Augustinians his picture of the
"Adoration of the Magi". He returned to Liege in 1647 and
executed many paintings for the churches of his native town. In
1670 he was invited to return to Paris, and painted the ceiling
of the audience room in the Tuileries. Louis XIV made him a
professor of the Royal Academy of Paris. Towards the close of
his life he returned to Liege and was elected a lay canon of the
church of St. Paul, and painted several works for the
prince-bishop of the city. A few years before he died he fell
into a state of profound melancholy and had to be placed under
the care of a medical man, in whose house he died. He was a
painter of the "grand style", full of inventive genius, but his
colouring is pate and weak and his figures somewhat artificial.
He is believed to have painted a portrait of Colbert and by some
writers is stated to have been a pupil at one time of Jordaens,
but this has never been verified.
GEORGE CHARLES WILLIAMSON
Patrick Fleming
Patrick Fleming
Franciscan friar b. at Lagan, Couny Louth, Ireland, 17April,
1599; d. 7 November, 1631. His father was great-grandson of Lord
Slane; his mother was daughter of Robert Cusack, a baron of the
exchequer and a near relative of Lord Delvin. In 1612, at a time
when religious persecution raged in Ireland, young Fleming went
to Flanders, and became a student, first at Douai, and then at
the College of St. Anthony of Padua at Louvain. In 1617 he took
the Franciscan habit and a year later made his solemn
profession. He then assumed in religion the name of Patrick,
Christopher being the name he received at baptism. Five years
after his solemn profession he went to Rome with Hugh
MacCaghwell, the definitor general of the order, and when he had
completed his studies at the College of St. Isidore, was
ordained priest. From Rome he was sent by his superiors to
Louvain and for some years lectured there on philosophy. During
that time he established a reputation for scholarship and
administrative capacity, and when the Franciscans of the Strict
Observance opened a college at Prague in Bohemia, Fleming was
appointed its first superior. He was also lecturer in theology.
The Thirty Years War was raging at this time, and in 1631 the
Elector of Saxony invaded Bohemia and threatened Prague.
Fleming, accompanied by a fellow-countryman named Matthew Hoar,
fled from the city. On 7 November the fugitives encountered a
party of armed Calvinist peasants; and the latter animated with
the fierce fanaticism of the times, fell upon the friars and
murdered them. Fleming's body was carried to the monastery of
Voticium, four miles distant from the scene of the murder and
there buried.
Eminent both in philosophy and theology, he was specially
devoted to ecclesiastical history, his tastes in this direction
being still further developed by his friendship for his learned
countryman Father Hugh Ward. The latter, desirous of writing on
early Christian Ireland, asked for Fleming's assistance which
was readily given. Even before Fleming left Louvain for Prague
he had massed considerable materials and had written a "Life of
St. Columba". It was not, however, published in his lifetime.
That and other MSS. fell into the hands of Thomas O'Sheerin,
lecturer in theology at the College of St. Anthony of Padua who
edited and published them at Louvain in 1667. Fleming also wrote
a life of Hugh MacCaghwell (q.v.), Primate of Armagh, a
chronicle of St. Peter's monastery at Ratisbon (an ancient Irish
foundation), and letters to Hugh Ratison on the lives and works
of the Irish saints. The letters have been published in "The
Irish Ecclesiastical Record" (see below). The work published at
Louvain in 1667 is now rare and costly; one copy in recent years
was sold for seventy pounds.
E.A. D'ALTON
Richard Fleming
Richard Fleming
(FLEMMING, FLEMMYNGE).
Bishop of Lincoln and founder of Lincoln College, Oxford; b. of
a good Yorkshire family about 1360, Croston being sometimes
mentioned, though without clear authority, as his birthplace; d.
at Sleaford, 25 Jan., 1431. He studied at University College,
Oxford, and became junior proctor in 1407. In 1409 he was chosen
by convocation as one of the twelve commissioners appointed to
examine the writings of Wyclif, though at this time he was
suspected of sympathy with the new movement and is mentioned by
name in a mandate which Archbishop Arundel addressed to the
chancellor in 1409 in order to suppress this tendency in the
university. If the archbishop's description is correct the date
usually assigned for Fleming's birth must be far too early, for
a man close on fifty could not be mentioned as one of a company
of beardless boys who had scarcely put away the playthings of
youth (Wilkins, Conc. Magn. Brit., III, 322). If he ever had any
sympathy with Wyclif it did not extend to Wyclif's heretical
doctrines, for his own orthodoxy was beyond suspicion and it
subsequently became his duty as bishop to burn the exhumed body
of Wyclif in 1428. He held successively the prebends of South
Newbald (22 Aug.,1406) and Langtoft (21 Aug. 1415), both in York
Diocese, and subsequently was rector of Boston. He became
bachelor in divinity some time before 1413. Finally he was
elected Bishop of Lincoln, 20 Nov., 1419, in succession to
Philip Repyngdon, and was consecrated at Florence, 28 April,
1420. In 1422 he was in Germany at the head of an embassy, and
in June 1423 he acted as president of the English
representatives at the Council of Pavia which was transferred to
Siena and finally developed into the Council of Basle. More than
once he preached before the council, but as he supported the
rights of the pope against the assembled Fathers his views were
disapproved of. The pope, however, showed him favour by
appointing him as his chamberlain and naming him Archbishop of
York in 1424. Difficulties, however, arose with the king's
ministers, and the appointment was set aside. On returning to
Lincoln, the bishop began the foundation of Lincoln College,
which he intended to be a collegiolum of theologians connected
with the three parish churches of St. Mildred, St. Michael, and
Allhallows, Oxford. The preface which he wrote to the statutes
is printed in the "Statutes of Lincoln College" (Oxford 1853).
He proved a vigorous administrator of his diocese, and added to
his cathedral a chantry in which he was subsequently buried. One
work now lost, "Super Angliae Etymologia", is attributed to him
by Bale.
EDWIN BURTON
Thomas Fleming
Thomas Fleming
Archbishop of Dublin, son of the Baron of Slane, b. in 1593; d.
in 1665. He studied at thy Franciscan College of Louvain, became
a priest of the Franciscan Order, and after finishing his
studies continued at Louvain for a number of years as professor.
In October, 1623, he was appointed by Urban VIII to Dublin as
successor of Archbishop Matthews. His appointment gave great
offense to opponents of the religious orders, and a bitter
onslaught was begun against the new archbishop by the priest
Paul Harris, in his "Olfactorium" and other brochures.
Archbishop Fleming convened and presided at a provincial synod
of the province of Dublin in 1640. When the Confederate war
broke out (1641-1642) the archbishop, though rather a man of
peace, felt constrained to take sides with the Confederates and
despatched a procurator to represent him at the synod of the
clergy held in Kilkenny (May, 1642). Later on, when the general
assembly was convoked at Kilkenny for October, the archbishop
resolved to attend personally and take part in the
deliberations. As might be expected from his antecedents, and
especially from his connection with the Anglo-Irish nobility of
the Pale, he was opposed to the "thorough" policy of the Old
Irish, and wished for peace at all costs. In 1643 he was one of
the prelates who signed the commission empowering
representatives of the Confederates to treat with Ormond for a
cessation of hostilities. He also opposed Scarampa and
Rinuccini, the later of whom was strongly identified with
Old-Irish party. In 1649, when all was lost, and the defeated
Irish were confronted with Cromwell, a reconciliation was
effected with Ormond at a synod of bishops, a step which
Archbishop Fleming favoured. But even then King Charles could
not recognize his real friends, and the alliance was broken off.
The remainder of the archbishop's life was much disturbed by
religious persecution carried on by the government of Cromwell.
He died in 1655, and the severity of the persecution may be
judged from the fact that until 1669 no successor could be
appointed. The diocese was administered by vicars until the
nomination of Peter Talbot in 1669.
JAMES MACCAFFREY
John Fletcher
John Fletcher
A missionary and theologian, b. at Ormskirk, England, of an old
Catholic family; educated at Douai and afterwards at St.
Gregory's, Paris; d. about 1848. After ordination to the
priesthood he became a professor at the College at St-Omer, of
which his great-uncle, Rev. William Wilkinson, had been
president. When the French Revolution broke out he was taken
prisoner with the other collegians and spent many months in
captivity at Arras and Dourlens. After they were released in
1795 he returned to England and acted as priest first at Hexham,
then at Blackburn, and finally at Weston Underwood (1827), the
seat of the Throckmortons. Having acted for a time as chaplain
to the dowager Lady Throckmorton he took charge of Leamington
Mission (1839-1844). He removed thence to Northampton in 1844
and resigned, owing to his great age, in 1848, after which his
name does not appear in the "Catholic Directory", though his
death is not therein recorded. Dr. Fletcher's works are:
"Sermons on various Religious and Moral Subjects for all the
Sundays after Pentecost" (2 vols., 1812, 1821), the introduction
is "An Essay on the Spirit of Controversy", also published
separately; "The Catholic's Manual", translated from Bossuet
with a commentary and notes (1817, 1829); "Thoughts on the
Rights and Prerogatives of Church and State, with some
observations upon the question of Catholic Securities" (1823);
"A Comparative View of the Grounds of the Catholic and
Protestant Churches" (1826), "The Catholic's Prayerbook",
compiled from a MS. drawn up in 1813 by Rev. Joseph Berington
(q.v.); "The Prudent Christian; or Considerations on the
Importance and Happiness of Attending to the Care of Our
Salvation" (1834); "The Guide to the True Religion" (1836);
"Transubstantiation: a Letter to the Lord--" (1836); "On the Use
of the Bible"; "The Letters of Fenelon, with Illustrations"
(1837); "A Short Historical View of the Rise, Progress and
Establishment of the Anglican Church" (1843). He translated
Blessed Edmund Campion's "Decem Rationes" (1827); de Maistre's
"Letters on the Spanish Inquisition" (1838); and Fenelon's
"Reflections for Every Day of the Month" (1844). He also brought
out an edition of "My Motives for Renouncing the Protestant
Religion" by Antonio de Dominis (1828).
EDWIN BURTON
William Flete
William Flete
An Augustinian hermit friar, a contemporary and great friend of
St. Catherine of Siena; the exact place and date of his birth
are unknown and those of his death are disputed. He was an
English mystic, and lived in the latter half of the fourteenth
century; educated at Cambridge, he afterwards joined the Austin
Friars in England, but desiring a stricter than they were
living, and hearing that there were two monasteries of his order
which had returned to primitive discipline near Siena, he set
out for Italy. On reaching the forest of Lecceto near Siena, in
which one of these monasteries stood, he found the place, which
abounded in caves, suited to the contemplative life, that with
the consent of his superiors he joined this community.
Henceforth he spent his days in study and contemplation in one
of these caves, and returned to the monastery at night to sleep.
He was called the "Bachelor of the Wood"; here he became
acquainted with St. Catherine, who occasionally visited him at
Lecceto and went to confession to him. He had so great a love
for solitude, that he declined to leave it when invited by Pope
Urban VI to go to Rome, to assist him with his counsel at the
time of the papal schisms then disturbing the Church.
He wrote a long panegyric on St. Catherine at her death, which,
with another of his works, is preserved in the public library at
Siena. For at least nineteen years he led a most holy and
austere life in this wood, and is said by Torellus to have
returned to England, immediately after St. Catherine's death in
1383, and, after introducing the reform of Lecceto, to have died
the same year. Others say he died in 1383, but there is no
mention of his death in the book of the dead at Lecceto, and the
exact date of it is uncertain. He was considered a saint by his
contemporaries.
None of his works have been printed: they consist of six
manuscripts; (1) an epistle to the provincial of his order; (2)
a letter to the doctors of the province; (3) an epistle to the
brethren in general; (4) predictions to the English of
calamities coming upon England (in this he prophesied that
England would lose the Catholic faith); (5) divers epistles; (6)
a treatise on remedies against temptations. A fifteenth century
manuscript of this last is now in the University Library at
Cambridge, to which it was presented by George I.
FRANCESCA M. STEELE
Zenaide-Marie-Anne Fleuriot
Zenaide-Marie-Anne Fleuriot
A French novelist, b. at Saint-Brieuc, 12 September, 1829; d. at
Paris, 18 December, 1890. She published her first novel, "Les
souvenirs d' une douairiere", in 1859, and its success led her
to adopt the literary profession. Either under her real name or
the pseudonym of "Anna Edianez de Saint-B", she published a
large number of novels, most of which were intended for women
and girls. She was a constant contributor to "Le Journal de la
jeunesse" and "La Bibliotheque rose", whose aim is to provide
young people with unobjectionable reading. Her novels are
written in a simple, easy style which leaves the reader's whole
attention free to occupy itself with the interest of the story;
they are Catholic in the true sense of the word, for they not
only contain no unorthodox opinion, but present none of those
evil suggestions with which many writers have won popularity and
lucre. The following deserve to be specially mentioned: "La vie
en Famille" (Paris, 1862); "La clef d'or" (Paris, 1870); "Le
theatre chez soi" (Paris, 1873); "Monsieur Nostradamus" (Paris,
1875); "Sans beaute" (Paris, 1889).
PIERRE MARIQUE
Abbey of Fleury
Abbey of Fleury
(More completely FLEURY-SAINT-BENOIT)
One of the oldest and most celebrated Benedictine abbeys of
Western Europe. Its modern name is Saint-Benoit-sur-Loire,
applicable both to the monastery and the township with which the
abbey has always been associated. Situated, as its name implies,
on the banks of the Loire, the little town is of easy access
from Orleans. Its railway station, St-Benoit--St-Aignan (Loiret)
is a little over a mile from the old Floriacum. Long before
reaching the station, the traveller is struck by the imposing
mass of a monastic church looming up solitary in the plain of
the Loire. The church of Floriacum has survived the stately
habitation of abbot and monks. The list of the abbots of Fleury
contains eighty-nine names, a noble record for one single abbey.
From Merovingian names like St. Mommolus, and Carlovingian names
like St. Abbo, we come upon names that arouse different
feelings, like Odet de Coligny (Cardinal de Chatillon), Armand
du Plessis (Cardinal de Richelieu). The last twenty-two abbots
held the abbey in commendam. The list closes with Georges-Louis
Phelypeaux, Archbishop of Bourges, in 1789. Tradition, accepted
by Mabillon, attributes the foundation of Fleury to Leodebaldus,
Abbot of St-Aignan (Orleans) about 640. Before the days of the
monks there was a Gallo-Roman villa called Floriacum, in the
Vallis aurea. This was the spot selected by the Abbot of
St-Aignan for his foundation, and from the very St. Fleury seems
to have known the Benedictine rule. Rigomarus was its first
abbot.
Church building must have made busy men of many abbots of
Fleury. From the very start the abbey boasted of two churches,
one in honour of St. Peter and the other in honour of the
Blessed Virgin. This latter became the great basilica that
started the erection of a gigantic feudal tower, intending it to
be one day the west front of the abbey church. His bold plan
became a reality, and in 1218 the edifice was completed. It is a
fine specimen of the romanesque style, and the tower of Abbot
Gauzlin, resting on fifty columns, forms a unique porch. The
church is about three hundred feet long and one hundred and
forty feet wide at the transepts. The crypt alone would repay an
artist's journey. The choir of the church contains the tomb of a
French monarch, Philip I, buried there in 1108. But the boast of
Fleury is the relics of St. Benedict, the father of Western
monasticism. Mommolus, the second Abbot of Fleury, is said to
have effected their transfer from Monte Cassino when that abbey
fell into decay after the ravages of the Lombards. Nothing is
more certain than the belief of western Europe in the presence
of these precious relics at Fleury. To them more than to its
flourishing schools Fleury owed wealth and fame, and today
French piety surrounds them with no less honour than when kings
came thither to pray. The monks of Monte Cassino impugn the
claims of Fleury, but without ever showing any relics to make
good their contention that they possess the body of the founder.
No doubt there is much fabulous matter in the Fleury accounts of
the famous transfer, but we must remember they were written at
the when even good causes were more effectively defended by
introducing the supernatural than by the most obvious natural
explanations.
ANSCAR VONIER
Andre-Hercule de Fleury
Andre-Hercule de Fleury
Born at Lodeve, 26 June, 1653; died at Paris, 29 January, 1742.
He was a protege of Cardinal de Bonzi and become chaplain to
Maria Theresa in 16790, and to Louis XIV in 1683. He was
appointed bishop of Frejus in 1698, but resigned the see in
1715, when he received the Abbey of Tournus and was appointed
tutor to the young Louis XV. Naturally cold and imperturbable,
he remained in the background during the regency. When Louis XV
attained his majority in 1723, it was at the instance of Fleury
that the Duc de Bourbon was made prime minister, and quarrelling
with the Duke, Fleury pretended to retire to Issy. Louis XV,
however, who admired and loved his tutor, sent the Duke into
exile, and entrusted the government to Fleury. True to his
habits of discretion, and accustomed, as Duclos says, "to bridle
the envious", he never assumed the title of prime minister. He
was made cardinal in September, 1726, and until his death
remained the guiding spirit in French politics.
Comparing the three cardinals, d'Argenson said: "Richelieu bled
France, Mazarin purged it, and Fleury put it on a diet". He
alluded in this bantering way to the cardinal's policy of
economy which, among other drawbacks, retarded the development
of the French military marine at the very period when the
mercantile marine, thanks to private enterprise, was making
considerable progress. In spite of this, Fluery had the
qualities of a great minister. He was the first to foresee that
France would not always be at enmity with the Hapsburghs. In
connection with the Polish succession and the Duchy of Lorraine,
he availed himself of the best advice of the diplomat Chauvelin,
when it became necessary to play a cautious game with Austria.
But, as Vandal says, the policy of Chauvelin was that of the
past. Fleury, in redoubling his efforts to bring about as
quickly as possible pleasant relations between the King of
France and the emperor, was the precursor of Choisuel,
Vergennes, and Talleyrand. He was accused of timidity when, at
the outbreak of the War of Austrian Succession he wrote a letter
to general Koenigseck, in which he seemed to apologize for this
war. But, in truth, Fleury was simply anticipating the policy of
the renversement des alliances (breaking up of the alliances),
which began in 1756, and which by uniting France and Austria was
to be more in conformity with the Catholic traditions of both
countries. The opinions of historians like Vandal and Masson
with regard to this renversement des alliances, so long the
object of criticism, tends to justify Cardinal Fleury.
During the period of Fleury's power, Jansenism was gaining
ground among the masses as a superstitious sect, as is evidenced
by the miracles of the deacon Paris, while among the upper
classes it took shape as a political faction. Fleury was the
minister who had to contend with a Jansenist opposition in the
Parliament of Paris. He reserved to royal authority all matters
relating to Jansenists, one consequence of which was a "strike"
on the part of the magistrates and lawyers, which Fleury
suppressed with certain measures of severity. He became a member
of the Academy in 1717 and was the first to propose sending a
scientific expedition to the far north and to Peru to measure
the degrees of the meridian.
Marais, Memoires (Paris, 1857); D'Argenson, Journal (Paris,
1859-67); Duclos, Memoires secrets (Paris, 1791); Lacretelle,
Histoire de France pendant le 18e siecle (Partis, 1830); Jobez,
La France sous Louis XV (Paris, 1861-73); Duc de Broglie, Le
Cardinal de Fleury et la Pragmatqiue imperiale in Revue
historique (1882).
GEORGES GOYAU
Flodoard
Flodoard
(Or FRODOARD)
French historian and chronicler, b. at Epernay in 894; d. in
966. He was educated at Reims, where he became canon of the
cathedral and keeper of the episcopal archives. He visited Rome
during the pontificate of Leo VII (936-939) and was shown much
favour by the pope. In gratitude he wrote a long poem in Latin
hexameters, celebrating the deeds of Christ and of the first
saints in Palestine and Antioch, adding a versified narration of
the history of the popes. The whole work, which is legendary
rather than historical, was dedicated to Archbishop Rotbert of
Trier. When his patron and protector, Archbishop Artold of
Reims, was deposed through the intrigues of the powerful
Heribert, Count of Vermandois, Flodoard remained loyal to him,
and after Artold's re-establishment became his trusted
counsellor. In 952 he retired to a monastery, probably that of
St. Basol, and became abbot. This dignity he laid down when
seventy years of age.
At the instance of Archbishop Rotbert Flodoard undertook to
write a history of the Church of Reims, "Historia Remensis
ecclesiae", for which he used the episcopal archives as well as
the writings of Bishop Hinemar. This work is of the greatest
value on account of the completeness of the material as well as
the truthfulness of the narration. Flodoard's other great work
is the "Annales", which covers the period from 919 to 966. With
the most painstaking exactness he narrates in plain, simple
language all the events that happened during these years, and
thus the work is of the utmost importance for a knowledge of the
history of France, Lorraine, and the East Franconian realm. With
this chronicle he was occupied almost to the day of his death.
An addition was made subsequently to cover the period from
976-978. The "Historia Remensis ecclesiae" was first edited by
Sirmond (Paris, 1611); the best edition is that of Heller and
Waitz in the "Monumenta Germaniae historica: Scriptores", XIII,
405-599 (Hanover, 1881). The "Annales" were edited by Pertz in
the same work, III, 363-408 (Hanover, 1839). The poem was
published in Mabillon's "Acta Sanctorum", vol. III (Paris,
1668-1701). Flodoard's complete works were published with a
French translation by the Academy of Reims (Reims, 1854-55, 3
vols.) and in Migne's Latin Patrology, CXXXV, 1-866.
ARTHUR F.J. REMY
Abbey of Floreffe
Abbey of Floreffe
Pleasantly situated on the right bank of the Sambre, about seven
miles southwest of Namur, Belgium, owes its foundation to
Godfrey, Count of Namur, and his wife Ermensendis. When St.
Norbert, in the year after the foundation his order, returned
from Cologne with a rich treasure of relics for his new church
at Premontre, Godfrey and Ermensendis went to meet him and
received him in their castle at Namur. So edified were they with
what they had seen and heard, that they besought the saint to
found a house at Floreffe. The charter by which they made over a
church and house to Norbert and his order bears the date of 27
Novemher, 1121 that Floreffe is chronologically speaking, the
second abbey of the order. Norbert laid the foundations of the
church which was called Salve, and the abbey received the sweet
name of Flos Mariae, the Flower of Mary. The chronicles of
Floreffe record the following event: While celebrating Mass at
Floreffe, the saint saw a drop of Blood issuing from the Sacred
Host to the paten. Distrusting his own eyes, he said to the
deacon who assisted him: "Brother, do you see what I see?" "Yes,
Father" answered the deacon, "I see a drop of Blood which gives
out a brilliant light". The altar stone on which St. Norbert
celebrated Mass is still preserved at Floreffe. St. Norbert
placed Richard, one of his first disciples, at the head of the
young community. The second abbot, Almaric, was commissioned by
Pope Innocent II to preach the Gospel in Palestine. Accompanied
by a band of chosen religious of Floreffe, he journeyed to Holy
Land and founded the abbey of St. Habacuc (1137). Philip Count
of Namur, gave to Weric, the sixth abbot, a large piece of the
Holy Cross which he had received from his brother Baldwin,
emperor of Constantinople. The chronicles record that twice,
namely in 1204 and 1254, Blood flowed from this relic on the
Feast of the Invention of the Holy Cross, the miracle being
witnessed by the religious and by a large concourse of people.
At the suppression of the Abbey of Floreffe, the relic was
removed to a place of safety. When a few years ago, the
Norbertine canons, who had been expelled from France, bought an
old Augustinian Monastery at Bois-Seigneur-Isaac, this precious
relic was restored to them, so that it is again in the custody
of the sons of St. Norbert. All the abbeys and convents founded
by the Abbey of Floreffe have ceased to exist with the exception
of Postel and Leffe. Louis de Fromantau, elected in 1791, was
the fifty-fifth and last abbot of Floreffe. When the French
Republican army over-ran Belgium the religious were expelled,
and the abbey with all its possessions was confiscated. Put up
for sale in 1797, it was bought back for the abbot and his
community. After the Concordat the abbot and a few of his
religious returned to the abbey, but so great were the
difficulties that after the death of the last religious the
abbey became the property of the Bishop of Namur and is now the
seat of a flourishing seminary.
F.M. GEUDENS
Florence
Florence
(Lat. Florentia; It. Firenze). ARCHDIOCESE OF FLORENCE
(FLORENTINA).
Located in the province of Tuscany (Central Italy). The city is
situated on the Arno in a fertile plain at the foot of the
Fiesole hills, whence came its first inhabitants (about 200
B.C.). In 82 B.C. Sulla destroyed it because it supported the
democratic party at Rome. In 59 B.C. it was rebuilt by Caesar at
a short distance from its original site. It served then as a
military post and commanded the ford of the Arno. Soon
afterwards it became a flourishing municipium.
EARLY MEDIEVAL HISTORY
Besieged and probably captured by Totila (541), it was retaken
(552) by the Byzantine general Narses. The most famous of its
few antiquities dating from Roman times is the amphitheatre
known as the Parlagio. In ancient times it was a town of small
importance; its prosperity did not begin until the eleventh
century. During the Lombard period Florence belonged to the
Duchy of Chiusi; after the absorption of the Lombard kingdom by
Charlemagne, who spent at Florence the Christmas of 786, it was
the residence of a count whose overlord was margrave of Tuscany.
In the two centuries of conflict between the popes and the
emperors over the feudal legacy of Countess Matilda (d. 1115)
the city played a prominent part; it was precisely to this
conflict that the republic owed its wonderful development.
During this period Florence stood always for the papacy, knowing
well that it was thus ensuring its own liberty. In the eleventh
and twelfth centuries the Florentines fought successfully
against Fiesole, which was destroyed in 1125, and against
several neighbouring feudal lords who had harassed the trade of
the town, the Alberti, Guido Guerra, the Buondelmonti (whose
castle of Montebuoni was destroyed in 1135), the Uberti, the
Cadolinghi, the Ubaldini, and others. These nobles were all
obliged to take up their residence in the town, and spend there
at least three months of every year. In 1113 the Florentines,
never partial to the German Emperors, rose against the imperial
vicar in Florence.
The first public meeting of the townsfolk which paved the way
for the establishment of the "Commune" was convened by Bishop
Ranieri in 1105. About the same time they helped the Pisans in
the conquest of the Balearic Isles (1114) asking no other reward
than two porphyry columns for the great central doorway of the
Baptistery (San Giovanni). By 1155 they had grown so powerful
that they dared to close their gates against Frederick
Barbarossa. The nobles (magnates, grandi), forced to become
citizens, were not slow in creating disturbances in the town by
their rival factions, and in hindering the work of the consuls
who chanced to be displeasing to them. In this way there was
endless friction an strife, and thus was laid the foundation of
the two great parties that for centuries divided the city,
Guelphs and Ghibellines. The former was democratic, republican,
favourable to the papacy; the latter was the party of the old
Florentine aristocracy and the emperor. In 1197 the Tuscan
League (in imitation of the successful Lombard League) was
formed at San Ginesio between the cities of Florence, Lucca,
Siena, Prato, San Miniato, and the Bishop of Volterra, in
presence of papal legates. These cities bound them selves on
that occasion not to acknowledge the author ity of emperor,
king, duke, or marquis without the ex press order of the Roman
Church. At that time, in the interest of better administration,
Florence abolished its old-time government by two consuls, and
substituted a podest`a, or chief magistrate (1193), with a
council of twelve consuls. In 1207 a law was passed which made
it obligatory for the podest`a to be an outsider. The
legislative power originally resided in the Statuto, a
commission nominated by the consuls. After the introduction of a
podest`a it was exercised by the priors of the chief guilds (the
artes majores), seven in number (carpenters, wool-weavers,
skinners, tanners, tailors, shoemakers, and farriers), to which
were afterwards added the fourteen lesser guilds (the judges,
the notaries-public, doctors, money-changers, and others). To
hold any public office it was necessary to belong to one or
other of these guilds (arti); the nobles were therefore wont to
enter their names on the books of the wool-weavers' guild. The
management of all political affairs rested with the Signoria,
and there was a kind of public parliament which met four times a
year. Public business was attended to by the podest`a, assisted
in their turns by two of the consuls.
GUELPHS AND GHIBELLINES
A broken engagement between one of the Buondelmonti and a
daughter of the house of Amidei, and the killing of the young
man, were the causes of a fierce civil strife in 1215 an long
after. Some sided with the Buondelmonti and the Donati, who were
Guelphs; others sympathized with the Amidei and the Uberti, who
were Ghibellines. Up to 1249 the two factions fought on sight;
in that year Emperor Frederick II, who wished to have Florence
on his side in his struggle with the papacy, sent the Uberti
reinforcements of German mercenaries with whose aid they drove
out the Buondelmonti and so many of their followers that the
Guelph party was completely routed. The Ghibellines straightway
established an aristocratic government but retained the
podest`a. The people were deprived of their rights, but they
assembled on 20 October, 1250, in the church of Santa Croce and
deposed the podest`a and his Ghibelline administration. The
government was then entrusted to two men, one a podest`a, the
other a Capitano del Popolo (captain of the people), both of
them outsiders; besides these the six precincts of the town
nominated each two anziani, or elders. For military purposes the
town was divided into twenty gonfaloni or banner-wards, the
country around about into sixty-six, the whole force being under
the command of the gonfaloniere. The advantage of the new
arrangement was quickly shown in the wars against neighbouring
towns once their allies, but which had fallen under Ghibelline
control. In 1253 Pistoia was taken, and was forced to recall the
exiled Guelphs. The year 1254 has been called the year of
victories. Siena, Volterra, and Pisa were then constrained to
accept peace on severe terms, and to expel the Ghibellines. In
1255 it was the turn of Arezzo; Pisa was once more defeated at
Ponte Serchio, and forced to cede to Florence the Castello di
Mutrone, overlooking the sea. Hence forward war was continuous
between Pisa and Florence until the once powerful Pisa passed
completely into the power of the Florentines. In 1260, however,
Farinata degli Uberti, leader of the outlawed Ghibellines, with
the help of Siena and of the German bands in King Manfred's pay,
but mostly by deceiving the Florentines into believing that he
would betray Siena into their hands, defeated (4 Sept.) the
Florentine army of 30,000 foot and 3,000 horse in the battle of
Montaperti. The Guelphs thereupon chose exile for themselves and
their families. The people's government was again overturned;
the citizens had to swear allegiance to King Manfred, and German
troops were called on to support the new order of things. The
podest`a, Guido Novello, was appointed by Manfred. After the
latter's death the Guelphs again took courage, and Guido Novello
was forced to make concessions. Finally, in 1266, the people
rose, and barricaded the streets with locked chains; Guido lost
courage and on 4 November, accompanied by his cavalry, fled from
the city. The popular government of the guild-masters or priors
(Capi delle arti) was restored; Charles of Anjou, brother of St.
Louis of France and King of Naples, was called in as peacemaker
(paciere) in 1267, and was appointed podest`a. Florence took
again the lead in the Tuscan League, soon began hostilities
against the few remaining Ghibelline towns, and with the help of
Pope Nicholas III succeeded in ridding itself of the
embarrassing protection of King Charles (1278). Nicholas also
attempted to reconcile the two factions, and with some success.
Peace was concluded (Cardinal Latini's peace) in 1280 and the
exiles returned.
The government was then carried on by the podest`a and the
capitano del popolo, aided by fourteen buoni uomini, i.e.
reputable citizens (eight Guelphs and six Ghibellines),
afterwards replaced by three (later six) guild-masters, elected
for two months, during which time they lived together in the
palace of the Signoria. Nor could they be reelected till after
two years. There were, moreover, two councils, in which also the
guild-masters took part. As a result of the assistance Florence
gave Genoa in the war against Pisa (1284 and 1285) its territory
was greatly extended. The victory at Campaldino (1289) over
Ghibelline Arezzo established firmly the hegemony of Florence in
Tuscany. In 1293 Pisa was obliged to grant Florence the right to
trade within its walls. Fresh troubles, however, were in store
for Florence. In 1293 the burgesses, exulting in their success,
and acting under the influence of Giano della Bella, excluded
the nobles from election to the office of guild-master. On the
other hand, even the lesser guilds were allowed to retain a
share in the government. To crown the insult a new magistrate,
styled gonfaloniere di giustizia, was appointed to repress all
abuses on the part of the nobles. The latter chose as their
leader and defender Corso Donati; the burgesses gathered about
the Cerchi family, whose members had grown rich in trade. The
common people or artisan class sided with the Donati. In 1295
Giano della Bella was found guilty of violating his own
ordinances, and was forced to leave Florence. The opposing
factions united now with similar factions in Pistoia; that of
the Cerchi with the Bianchi or Whites, that of the Donati with
the Neri or Blacks. To restore peace the guild-masters in 1300
exiled the leaders of both factions; among them went Dante
Alighieri. The leaders of the Bianchi were, however, soon
recalled. Thereupon the Neri appealed to Boniface VIII, who
persuaded Charles of Valois, brother of Philip the Fair of
France, to visit Florence as peace maker. He at once recalled
the Donati, or Neri, and set aside the remonstrances of the
Bianchi, who were once more expelled, Dante among them. The
exiles negotiated successively with Pisa, Bologna, and the
chiefs of the Ghibelline party for assistance against the Neri;
for a while they seemed to infuse new life into the Ghibelline
cause. Before long, however, both par ties split up into petty
factions. In 1304 Benedict XI essayed in vain to restore peace
by causing the recall of the exiles. The city then became the
wretched scene of incendiary attempts, murders, and robberies.
In 1306 the Ghibellines were once more driven out, thanks to
Corso Donati (Il Barone), who aimed at tyrannical power and was
soon hated by rich and poor alike, Aided by his father-in-law,
Uguccione della Faggiuola, leader of the Ghibellines in Romagna,
he attempted to overthrow the Signoria, accusing it of
corruption and venality. The people assembled and the
guild-masters condemned him as a traitor; he shut himself up in
his fortress-like house, but soon after wards fell from his
horse and was killed (13 Sept., 1308).
In 1310 Emperor Henry VII invaded Italy, and obliged
successively the cities of Lombardy to recognize his imperial
authority. The Florentine exiles (particularly Dante in his
Latin work "De Monarchia"), also the Pisans, ardently denounced
Florence to the emperor as the hotbed of rebellion in Italy.
Great was, therefore, the terror in Florence. AU the exiles,
save Dante, were recalled; but in order to have an ally against
the emperor, whose overlordship they refused to acknowledge,
they did homage to Robert, King of Naples. On his way to Rome
(1312) Henry found the gates of Florence closed against him. He
besieged it in vain, while Florentine money fanned the flames of
further revolt in all the cities of Lombardy. On his return
journey in October he was again obliged to abandon his siege of
Florence. At Pisa he laid Florence under the ban of the empire,
deprived it of all rights and privileges, and permitted the
counterfeiting of its coinage, the famous "florins of San
Giovanni", Pisa and Genoa were now eager for revenge on their
commercial rival, when suddenly Henry died. The Pisans then
elected as podest`a the aforesaid exiled Florentine, Uguccione
della Faggiuola, who be came master of several other towns of
which Lucca was the most important (1314). In 1315 he defeated
the Florentines near Montecatini, and already beheld Florence in
his power and himself master of Tuscany. Unfortunately, at this
juncture Lucca, under Castruccio Castracane, rebelled against
him and drove him out, nor was he ever able to return.
Castruccio, himself a Ghibelline, was a menace to the liberty of
the Tuscan League, always Guelph in character. After a guerrilla
warfare of three years, the army of the League under Raimondo
Cardona was defeated at Altopascio (1325), though the
Florentines succeeded in making good their retreat. To ensure
the safety of the city, Florence offered Charles, Duke of
Calabria, son of King Robert of Naples, the Signoria for ten
years. He came, and greatly curtailed the privileges of the
citizens. Happily for Florence he died in 1329, There upon,
Florence, having regained its freedom, remod elled its
government, and created five magistracies: (1) guild-masters
(priori) or supreme administrative power; (2) the Gonfalonieri
charged with the military operations; (3) the capitani di parte
(Guelphs, common people); (4) a board of trade (Guidici di
commercio); (5) consuls for the guilds (Consoli delle arli).
Moreover, two councils or assemblies were established, one
composed of three hundred Guelphs and the humbler citizens, the
other of various groups of rich and poor under the presidency of
the podest`a. These councils were renewed every four months.
LATER MEDIEVAL HISTORY
It has always been a cause for wonder that aamid so many
political, economical, and military vicissitudes the prosperity
of Florence never ceased to grow. Majestic churches arose amid
the din of arms, and splendid palaces were built on all sides,
though their owners must have been at all times uncertain of
peaceful possession. At the date we have now reached forty-six
towns and walled castelli, among them Fiesole and Empoli,
acknowledged the authority of Florence, and every year its mint
turned out between 350,000 and 400,000 gold forms. Its coinage
was the choicest and most reliable in Europe. The receipts of
its exchequer were greater than those of the Kings of Sicily and
Aragon. Merchants from Florence thronged the markets of the
known world, and established banks wherever they went. In the
city itself there were 110 churches, It openly aimed at
sovereignty over all Tuscany. Arms and money won for it Pistoia
(1329) and Arezzo (1336). It aided Venice (1338) against Mastino
della Scala, a peril to Florence since he became master of
Lucca. Knowing well the commercial greed of the Florentines,
Mastino, to free himself from their opposition, offered to sell
them Lucca. But the Pisans could not allow their ancient enemy
to come so near; they took up arms, captured Lucca, and defeated
the Florentines at La Ghiaia (1341). Seeing now that their
militia needed a skilful leader, the Florentines offered the
command and a limited dictatorship, first to Jacopo Gabrielli
d'Agabio, and when he proved unfit, to a French freebooter,
Gauthier de Brienne (1342), who styled himself Duke of Athens on
the strength of his descent from the dukes of Achaia. He played
his part so skilfully that he was proclaimed Signore for life.
In this way Florence imitated most other Italian cities, which
in their weariness of popular government had by this time chosen
princes to rule over them. Gauthier de Brienne, however, became
despotic, favoured the nobility and the populace (always allies
in Florence), and harassed the rich middle-class families
(Altoviti, Medici, Rucellai, Ricci). The populace soon tired of
him, and joined by the peasants (genti del contado), they raised
the cry of "liberty" on 26 July, 1343. Gauthier's soldiers were
slain, and he was forced to leave the city. But the newly
recovered liberty of Florence was dearly bought. Its subject
towns (Arezzo, Colle di Val d'Elsa, and San Geminiano) declared
themselves independent; Pistoia joined with Pisa; Ottaviano de'
Belforti was lord of Volterra. There was now an interval of
peace, during which the greater guilds (known as the popolo
grasso) strove gradually to restrict the rights of the lesser
guilds, which in the end found themselves shut out from all
public offices. Aided by the populace they threat ened
rebellion, and secured thus the abolition of the more onerous
laws.
It was now the turn of the humblest classes, hitherto without
political rights. Clearly they had reaped no advantage from
their support of the small bourgeoisie, and so they resolved to
resort to arms in their own behalf. Thus came about the
revolution of the Ciompi (1378), so called from the wool carders
(ciompi), who under Michele di Lando seized the palace of the
Signoria, and proclaimed their leader gonfaloniere di gonfalon.
They instituted three new guilds in which all artisans were to
be in scribed, and which had equal civil rights with the other
guilds. Michele, fearing that the popular tumult would end in a
restoration of the Signoria, went over to the burgesses; after a
sanguinary conflict the Ciompi were put to flight. The rich
burgesses were now more firmly established than before, which
did not remove the discontent of the lesser guilds and the
populace. This deep discontent was the source of the brilliant
fortune of Giovanni de' Medici, son of Bicci, the richest of the
Florentine bankers.
Apropos of this world-famous name it may be said here that the
scope of this article permits only a brief reference to the
great influence of medieval Florence as an industrial,
commercial, and financial centre. In the woollen industry it was
easily foremost, particularly in the dyeing and final
preparation of the manufactured goods. Its banking houses were
famous through all Europe, and had for clients not only a
multitude of private individuals, but also kings and popes. As
financial agents of the latter, the mercatores papae, the
Florentines were to be found in all the chief national centres,
and exercised no little influence. (See H. de B. Gibbins,
"History of Commerce in Europe", London, 1892; Peruzzi, "Storia
del corn mercio e dei banchieri di Firenze in tutto il mondo da
1200 fino a 1345", Florence, 1868; Toniolo, "Dei rimoti fattori
della potenza economica di Firenze nel medioevo", Milan, 1882;
G. Buonazia, "L'arte della lana" in "Nuova Antologia", 1870,
XIII, 327-425.)
To take up the thread of our narrative, several events of
interest had meanwhile occurred. In 1355 Emperor Charles III
appeared before Florence. The city had become more cautious as
it grew in wealth and did not, therefore, venture to resist him;
it seemed wiser to purchase, with gold and a nominal submission,
entailing as few obligations as possible, present security and
actual independence. The citizens swore allegiance on the
understanding that the emperor would ratify the laws made or to
be made in Florence; that the members of the Signoria (elected
by the citizens) should be, ipso facto, vicars imperial; that
neither the emperor himself nor any envoy of his should enter
the town; that he should be content with the payment of 100,000
forms, in lieu of all past claims (regalia), and a promise of
4000 forms annually during his life. The Florentines could
hardly as more complete autonomy. The populace, it is true,
opposed even this nominal submission, but it was explained to
them that their liberties were untouched. In 1360 Volterra
returned again to Florence, and war with Pisa followed. Pisa
sought the help of Bernabo Visconti; after a prolonged conflict
the Florentines won the decisive battle of San Savino (1364),
and peace was declared. In 1375 the inquisitor, Fra Pietro
d'Aquila, having exceeded his powers, the Signoria restricted
his authority and conferred on the ordinary civil courts
jurisdiction in all criminal cases of ecclesiastics. This
displeased the pope; and in consequence Guillaume de Noellet,
papal legate at Bologna, directed against Tuscany the band of
mercenaries known as the "White Company" (Compagnia Bianca).
Florence had hitherto been undeviatingly faithful to the Holy
See; it now began to rouse against the pope, not only the cities
of Romagna and the Marches, but even Rome itself. Eighty cities
joined in the movement. Gregory XI thereupon placed Florence
under interdict (1376), and allowed anyone to lay hands on the
goods and persons of the Florentines. Nor was this a mere
threat; the Florentine merchants in England were obliged to
return to Florence, leaving their property behind them. Not even
the intercession of St. Catharine of Siena, who went to Avignon
for the purpose, could win pardon for the city. It was only in
1378, after the Western Schism had begun, that Urban VI absolved
the Florentines. Even then the people compelled the offending
magistrates to give ample satisfaction to the pope (Gherardi, La
guerra de' Fiorentini con papa Gregorio XI, detta guerra degli
otto santi, Florence, 1869). Florence now beheld with no little
concern the political progress of Gian Galeazzo Visconti, Lord
of Milan. By the acquisition of Pisa he had gained a coveted
foothold in Tuscany. The Florentines sided with his numerous
enemies, all of whom were anxious to prevent the formation of an
Italian sole monarchy. Visconti was victorious, but he died in
1402, whereupon Florence at once laid siege to Pisa. In 1405
Giovanni Maria Visconti sold the town to the Florentines for
200,000 forms; but the Pisans continued to defend their city,
and it was not till 1406 that Gino Capponi captured it. A revolt
that broke out soon after the surrender was repressed with great
severity. The purchase (1421) of the port of Leghorn from Genoa
for 100,000 gold florins gave Florence at last a free passage to
the sea, nor did the citizens long delay to compete with Venice
and Genoa for the trade of the African and Levantine coasts
(1421). In 1415 the new constitutions of the republic were
promulgated. They were drawn up by the famous jurists Paolo di
Castro and Bartolommeo Volpi of the University of Florence.
THE MEDICI
Naturally enough, these numerous wars were very costly.
Consequently early in the fifteenth century the taxes increased
greatly and with them the popular discontent, despite the
strongly democratic character of the city government. Certain
families now began to assume a certain prominence. Maso degli
Albizzi was captain of the people for thirty years; after his
death other families sought the leadership. Giovanni di Bicci
de' Medici, to bring about a more equal distribution of
taxation, propose the catasto, i. e. an income-tax. This made
him very popular and he was proclaimed Gonfaloniere for life
(1421), His son Cosimo (d. 1464) inherited his immense riches
and popularity, but his generosity brought him under suspicion.
The chief men of the greater guilds, and especially the Albizzi
family, charged him with a desire to overthrow the government
and he was exiled to Padua (1433). In 1434 the new Signoria,
favourable to Cosimo, recalled him and gave him the proud title
of Pater Patriae, i. e. father of his country. In 1440 the
Albizzi were outlawed, and Cosimo found his path clear. He
scrupulously retained the old form of government, and refrained
from all arbitrary measures. He was open-handed, built palaces
and villas, also churches (San Marco, San Lorenzo); his costly
and rare library was open to all; he patronized scholars and
encouraged the arts. With him began the golden age of the
Medici. The republic now annexed the district of Casentino,
taken from the Visconti at the Peace of Gavriana (1441),
Cosimo's son Piero was by no means equal to his father;
nevertheless the happy ending of the war against Venice, the
former ally of Florence, shed glory on the Medici name. Piero
died in 1469, whereupon his sons Lorenzo and Giuliano were
created "princes of the State" (principi dello Stato). In 1478
occurred the conspiracy of the Pazzi, to whose ambitious plans
Lorenzo was an obstacle. A plot was formed to kill the two
Medici brothers in the cathedral on Easter Sunday; Giuliano
fell, but Lorenzo escaped. The authors of the plot, among them
Francesco Salviati, Archbishop of Pisa, perished at the hands of
the angry populace. Sixtus IV, whose nephew Girolamo Riario was
also an accomplice, laid the town under an interdict because of
the murder of Salviati and the Pazzi, and supported by the King
of Naples threatened to go to war, Hostilities had actually
begun, when Lorenzo set out for Naples and by his diplomatic
tact induced King Alfonso to make peace (1480); this obliged the
pope also to come to terms. Meanwhile, despite his almost
unlimited influence, Lorenzo refused to be anything else than
the foremost citizen of Florence. With the exception of Siena,
all Tuscany now acknowledged the rule of Florence and offered
the spectacle of an extensive principality governed by a
republic of free and equal citizens. Lorenzo died in 1492. (See
the life of Lorenzo by Roscoe, Liverpool, 1795, and often re
printed; also the German life by A. von Reumont, Leipzig, 1874,
and Eng. tr. by R. Harrison, London, 1876.)
Lorenzo was succeeded by his son, Piero, but he did not long
retain popularity, especially after he had ceded the fortresses
of Pietra Santa and Pontremoli to Charles VIII of France, who
entered Italy with the avowed purpose of overthrowing the
Aragonese do minion in Naples. The popular displeasure reached
its acme when Piero pawned the towns of Pisa and Leghorn to the
French king. He was driven out and the former republican
government restored, Charles VIII entered Florence and
endeavoured to have Piero's promises honoured; but the firmness
of Piero Capponi and a threatened uprising of the people forced
the French king to quit Tuscany (1494). There were at that time
three parties in Florence: the Medicean party, known as the
Palleschi (from the palle or little balls in the Medici coat of
arms), the oligarchic republicans, called the Arrabiati
(enraged), and the democrats or Piagnoni (weepers). The last had
for chief the Dominican friar, Girolamo Savonarola of Ferrara,
who hoped by their aid to restore in Florence piety and a
Christian discipline of life, i.e. to establish in the city the
Kingdom of Christ. In fact, Christ was publicly proclaimed Lord
or Signore of Florence (Rex populi Florentini). (For the
irreligious and rationalistic elements in the city at this
period see GUICCIARDINI and MACHIAVELLI). Savonarola's
intemperate speeches were the occasion of his excommunication,
and in 1498 he was publicly burned. The Arrabiati were then in
power. In 1512 Cardinal Giovanni de' Medici purchased at a great
price the support of the Spanish captain Cardona and sent him to
Florence to demand the return of the Medici. Fearing worse evils
the people consented, and Lorenzo II, son of Piero, was recalled
as prince. Cardinal Giovanni, however, kept the reins of power
in his own hands. As Leo X he sent thither Cardinal Giulio de'
Medici (the natural son of Giuliano), afterwards Clement VII.
The family had now reached the acme of its power and prestige.
The sack of Rome (1527) and the misfortunes of Clement VII
caused a third exile of the Medici. Ippolito and Alessandro,
cousins of the pope, were driven out.
In the peace concluded between Emperor Charles V and Clement VII
it was agreed that the Medici rule should be restored in
Florence. The citizens, how ever, would not listen to this, and
prepared for resistance. Their army was defeated at Gavinana
(1530) through the treachery of their general, Malatesta
Baglioni. A treaty was then made with the emperor Florence paid
a heavy war-indemnity and recalled the exiles, and the pope
granted a free amnesty. On 5 July, 1531, Alessandro de' Medici
returned and took the title of Duke, promising allegiance to the
emperor. Clement VII dictated a new constitution, in which among
other things the distinction between the greater and the lesser
guilds was removed. Alessandro was a man of dissolute habits,
and was stabbed to death by a distant relative, Lorenzino
(1538), no better, but more clever, than Alessandro. The
murderer fled at once from Florence. The party of Alessandro now
offered the ducal office to Cosimo de' Medici, son of Giovanni
delle Bande Nere. He avenged the death of Alessandro and finally
transformed the government into an absolute principality. This
he did by gradualiy equalizing the political status of the
inhabitants of Florence and of the subject cities and districts.
This is the last stage in the political history of Florence as a
distinct state; henceforth the political history of the city is
that of the Grand Duchy of Tuscany. When the new Kingdom of
Italy was proclaimed in 1861 Florence was chosen as the seat of
government and remained such till 1871.
Few cities have affected more profoundly the course of
civilization. In many ways mankind has drawn from Florence its
highest inspiration. Among the great poets Dante was a
Florentine, while Petrarch and Boccaccio were sons of
Florentines. Among the great painters Giotto found in Florence
patronage and a proper field for his genius. Fra Angelico
(Giovanni da Fiesole) was a Florentine, likewise Masaccio and
Donatello. Unrivalled sculptors, like Lorenzo Ghiberti and
Michelangelo, architects like Brunelleschi, universal savants
like Leone Battista Alberti, shine like brilliant gems in the
city's diadem of fame, and mark in some respects the highest
attainments of humanity. Florence was long the chief centre of
the Renaissance, the leaders of which were either citizens or
welcome guests of that city, e. g. Michael Chrysoloras, Giovanni
Argi ropulo, Leonardo Bruni, Cristoforo Landolfo, Niccolo
Niccoli, Pico della Mirandola, and others scarcely less
distinguished for their devotion to Greek and Latin literature,
philosophy, art, and antiquities. It was capable at the same
time of an incredible enthusiasm for Plato, whom men like
Marsilio Ficino wished to see canonized (Sieveking, Gesch. der
platon. Akademie zu Florenz, Gottingen, 1812), and of an equally
passionate zeal for the restoration of all things in Christ (see
SAVONAROLA). For its role in the restoration and development of
classical literary taste, both Greek and Latin, see HUMANISM,
and for its share in the growth of the fine arts see
RENAISSANCE.
INSTITUTIONS AND BUILDINGS
Florence is the seat of a university, and possesses also an
institute of social science, conservatory of music, a botanical
garden, and an observatory (astronomical, meteorological, and
seismological). Various scientific societies have their centres
there, e. g. the Accademia della Crusca, whose famous Italian
dictionary is one of the glories of the city. The city has four
libraries containing many rare manuscripts. The Biblioteca
Nazionale, one of the largest and most important in Europe,
founded in 1861 by merger of the famous Magliabecchiana and the
former (Pitti) Bibliotheca Palatina; the Laurentiana, founded in
1444 by Cosimo de' Medici; the Marucelliana, containing a
collection of brasses; the Riccardiana. The State archives are
the most important in Italy. Various art collections are: the
Uffizi Gallery; the Pitti, in the old palace of the grand dukes;
the archaeological museum with its fine collection of coins and
tapestries; the Museum of the Duomo or cathedral; the Accademia
delle belle arti (Academy of the Fine Arts); and the Casa
Buonarroti (house of Michelangelo). The charitable institutions
include: the Great Hospital (Arcispedale) of Santa Maria Nuova
(1800 beds), founded in 1285 by Falco Portinari, the father of
Dante's Beatrice; the Hospital of the Innocents, or Foundling
Hospital (1421); a home for the blind; an insane asylum, and
many private charities.
Among the numerous charitable works of Florence the most
popularly known is that of the "Confraternit`a della
Misericordia", founded in 1244, and attached to the oratory of
that name close by the cathedral. Its members belong to all
classes of Florentine society, the highest as well as the
lowest, and are bound to quit all work or occupation at the
sound of the oratory bell, and hasten to any scene of accident,
violent illness, sudden death, and the like. The costume of the
brotherhood is a rough black robe and girdle, with a hood that
completely covers the head except two loopholes for the eyes.
Thus attired, a little group may frequently be seen hastening
through the streets of Florence, bearing on their shoulders the
sick or the dead to the specific institution that is to care for
them (Bakounine, "La misericorde `a Florence" in "Le
Correspondant", 1884, 805-26).
The chief industries are the manufacture of majolica ware, the
copying of art works and their sale, also the manufacture of
felt and straw hats.
The more noted of the public squares of Florence are the Piazza
della Signoria (Palazzo Vecchio, Loggia de' Lanzi, and the
historic fountain by Ammannati); the Piazza del Duomo; the
Piazza di Santa Croce with its monument to Dante; the Piazza di
Santa Maria Novella, adorned by two obelisks. Among the famous
churches of Florence are the following: Santa Maria del Fiore,
otherwise the Duomo or cathedral, begun in 1296 by Arnolfo del
Cambio, consecrated in 1436 by Eugene IV, and called del Fiore
(of the flower), either in reference to the name of the city or
to the municipal arms, a red lily on a white ground. It is about
140 yards long, and badly proportioned. The admirable Campanile
was begun by Giotto, but finished by Taddeo Gaddi (1334-36). The
majestic dome is by Brunelleschi (1420) and furnished
inspiration to Michelangelo for the dome of St. Peter's. The
fac,ade was not completed until 1887; the bronze doors are also
a work of recent date. The Baptistery of San Giovanni dates from
the seventh century; it was remodelled in 1190, again in the
fifteenth century, and is octagonal in form. San Giovanni was
the old cathedral of Florence, around which in Lombard times
(seventh and eighth centuries) the city grew up. Some have
maintained that it rises on the site of an ancient temple of
Mars. Dante mentions it twice with veneration in the Paradiso
(xv, 136-37; xvi, 25-27). The three massive bronze doors of the
Baptistery are unparalleled in the world; one of them is the
work of Andrea Pisano (1330), the remaining two are the
masterpieces of Lorenzo Ghiberti (1403-47), and were declared by
Michelangelo fit to serve as the gates of paradise. Santa Croce
(Franciscans) is a Gothic church (1294-1442), with frescoes by
Giotto and his school. It is a kind of national Pantheon, and
contains monuments to many illustrious Italians. In the cloister
stands the chapel of the Pazzi family, the work of Brunelleschi,
with many rich friezes by the della Robbia. (Ozanam, "Sainte
Croix de Florence" in "Poetes franciscains ital.", Paris, 1852,
273-80). Santa Maria Novella, the Dominican counterpart of Santa
Croce, begun in 1278 by Fra Jacopo Talenti da Nipozzano, is also
a Gothic edifice. The fac,ade is by Leone Battista Alberti. The
church contains frescoes by Orcagna, Ghirlandaio, and Fra Lippo
Lippi. In its Ruccellai chapel is the famous Madonna of Cimabue.
Or San Michele, a unique artistic monument, was meant
originally, it is said, for a corn-market, but was remodelled in
1336. On the exterior walls are to be seen admirable statues of
the patron saints of the various Florentine guilds, the work of
Verrocchio, Donatello, Ghiberti, and others. San Lorenzo, dedi
cated in 393 under the holy bishop Zanobius by St. Ambrose, with
a sermon yet preserved (P. L., XIV, 107), was altered to its
present shape (1421-61) by Brunelleschi and Manetti at the
instance of Cosimo de' Medici. It contains in its sacristies
(Nuova, Vecchia) tombs of the Medici by Verrocchio, and more
famous ones by Michelangelo. San Marco (1290), with its adjacent
convent decorated in fresco by Fra Angelico was the home also of
Fra Bartolommeo della Porta, and of Savonarola. Santissima
Trinit`a contains frescoes by Ghirlandaio. Santa Maria del
Carmine, con tains the Brancacci Chapel, with frescoes by
Masaccio, Masolino, and Filippino Lippi. Other monumental or
historic churches are the. Santissima Annunziata (mother-house
of the Servites) and the Renaissance church of Ognissanti
(Franciscan).
Several Benedictine abbeys have had much to do with the
ecclesiastical history of Florence. Among them are San Miniato,
on the Arno, about twenty-one miles from Florence, restored in
the eleventh century, since the seventeenth century an episcopal
see (Cappelletti, "Chiese d' Italia", Venice, 1862, XVII 305-47;
Rondoni, "Memorie storiche di San Miniato", Venice, 1877, p.
1148); La Badia di Santa Maria, founded in 977 (Galletti,
Ragionamenti dell' origine e de' primi tempi della Badia
Fiorentina, Rome, 1773); San Salvatore a Settimo, founded in
988; Vallombrosa founded in 1039 by St. John Gualbert. All of
these being within easy reach of the city, exercised strong
religious influence, particularly in the long conflict between
the Church and the Empire. Besides the public buildings already
mentioned, we may note the Loggia del Bigallo, the Palazzo del
Podest`a (1255) now used as a museum, the Palazzo Strozzi,
Palazzo Riccardi, Palazzo Rucellai, and several other private
edifices of architectural and historic interest.
EPISCOPAL SUCCESSION
St. Frontinus is said by local tradition to have been the first
bishop and a disciple of St. Peter. In the Decian persecution
St. Miniatus (San Miniato) is said to have suffered martyrdom.
It is to him that is dedicated the famous church of the same
name on the hill overlooking the city. It has been suggested
that Miniatus is but a form of Minias (Mena), the name of a
saint who suffered at Alexandria. In 313 we find Bishop Felix
mentioned as present that year at a Roman synod. About 400 we
meet with the above-mentioned St. Zanobius. In the following
centuries Florence sank into obscurity, and little is known of
its civil or ecclesiastical life. With St. Reparatus (fi. 679),
the patron of the Duomo, begins the unbroken line of episcopal
succession. Among the best known of its medieval bishops are
Gerardo, later Pope Nicholas II and author (1059) of the famous
decree on papal elections; Pietro of Pavia, whom another
Florentine, San Pietro Aldobrandini (Petrus Igneus), convicted
of simony (1062); Ranieri (1101), who preached that Antichrist
had already come (Mansi, Suppl. Conc., II, 217); Ardengho, under
whom was fought (1245) a pitched battle with the Patarini or
Catharist heretics; Antonio Orso (1309), who roused all
Florence, and even his clergy, against the German Emperor Henry
VII; Angelo Acciaiuoli (1383), a zealous worker for the
extinction of the Western Schism; Francesco Zabarella (1410),
cardinal, canonist, and philosopher, prominent at the Council of
Constance. When in 1434 the see became vacant, Pope Eugene IV
did it the honour to rule it in person. Other archbishops of
Florence were Cardinal Giovanni Vitelleschi, captain of Eugene
IV's army; the Domini can St. Antoninus Forcillioni, d. 1459;
Cosimo de' Pazzi (1508), a learned humanist and philosopher;
Antonio Martini, translator of the Bible into Italian (1781). In
1809 Napoleon, to the great dissatisfaction of the diocese,
imposed on Florence as its archbishop Monsignor d'Osmond, Bishop
of Nancy. To Eugenio Cecconi (1874-88) we owe an (unfinished)
"Storia del concilio ecumenico Vaticano" (Rome, 1872-79).
Archbishop Alfonso Maria Mistrangelo, of the Society of the
Pious Schools (Scuole Pie), was born at Savona, in 1852, and
transferred (19 June, 1899) from Pontremoli to Florence.
Saints and Popes. Florence is the mother of many saints. Besides
those already mentioned, there are Bl. Uberto degli Uberti, Bl.
Luca Mongoli, Bl. Dome nico Bianchi, Bl. Antonio Baldinucci, St.
Catherine de' Ricci, St. Mary Magdalen de' Pazzi, and St. Philip
Neri. The Florentine popes are: Leo X (1513-21), Clement VII
(1523-34), Clement VIII (1592-1605), Leo XI (1605), Urban VIII
(1623-44), and Clement XII (1730-40).
Since 1420 Florence has been an archdiocese; its suffragan sees
are: Borgo San Sepolero, Colle di Val d'Elsa Fiesole, San
Miniato, Modigliana, and the united Dioceses of Pistoia and
Prato. The Archdiocese of Florence has 800 secular and 336
regular clergy; 479 parishes and 1900 churches, chapels, and
oratories; 200 theological students; 44 monasteries (men) and 80
convents (women). In 1907 the population of the archdiocese,
almost exclusively Catholic, was 500,000.
The literature of this subject is so extensive that only a few
titles can be here given. General bibliographies will be found
in CHEVALIER, Topo-bibl. (Paris, 1894--) 8. v., and P. BIGAZZI,
Firenze e contorni, manuale bibliographico-biografico (Florence,
1893), 360. ECCLESIASTICAL:--CAPPELLETTI, Le chiese d'Italia
(Venice, 1861), XVI, 407-12; CERRACHINI, Cronologia sacra dei
vescovi ed arcivescovi di frirenze (Florence, 1718 LAMIO, Sacrce
Ecc. Florentinae Monumenta (Florence, 1738; GORI, Hagiologium
Ecc. Florent. (Florence, 1787); RICHA, Notizie istoriche delle
chiese florentine (Florence 1754-62); COCCHI Le chiese di
Firenze dal secolo IV jino al secolo XX (Florence, 1903). The
reader may also consult the seventeenth-century documentary work
of UGHELLI, Italia Sacra, III, 14 sqq., and F. M. FIORENTINI,
Hetruscae pietatis origines (Lucca, 1701); also CIANFOGNI (ed.
MORENI), Memorie istoriche delta Ambrosiana basilica di San
Lorenzo (Florence, 1804, 1816, 17); LUMACHI, Mernorie storiche
dell' antica basilica di San Giovanni di Firenze (Florence,
1782) and G. BEFANI, Memorie storiche dell' antica basilica di
San Giovanni di Firenze (Florence, 1886); GODKIN, The Monastery
of San Marco in Florence (London, 1887). For the hospitals and
other charitable works of Florence, see PASSERINI, Storia degli
stabilimenti di beneficenza della citt`a di Firenze (Florence,
1853).--For the ecclesiastical sciences in Florence see
CERRACHINI, Catalogo generate de' teologi della eccelsa univ.
Fiorentina (Florence, 1725); IDEM, Faati teologici (Florence,
1738); SCHIFF, L'Universit`a degli studi in Firenze (Bologna,
1887). CIVIL:--Florentine historiography is very rich, and may
best be studied in special introductory works like BALZANI, Le
Cronache d'Italia (Milan, 1884). also in Eng. tr. S. P. C. K.:
cf. HEGEL, Ueber die Anjange der florentinischen
Geschichtschreiburg in SYBEL, Hist. Zeitschrift (1876), XXXV,
32-63; also the pertinent writings of SCHEFFER-BOICHORST, e. g.
Florentiner Studien (Leipzig i873). For the Historie Fiorentine,
or Chronica of GIOVANNI VILLANI (d. 1348), see the Turin edition
(1879) and for the still more celebrated Historic Fiorenline,
libri VIII oi MACHIAVELLI see the PASSERINI edition (Florence,
1873), and the Eng. tr. in Bohn's Standard Library (1847). Among
the modern comprehensive histories of Florence may be mentioned:
CAPPONI, Storia delta repubblica florentina (3d ed., Florence,
1886); VILLARI, Storia di Firenze (Milan, 1890); IDEM, I due
primi secoli delta storia di Firenze (Florence, 1893-98); PER
HENS, Histoire de Florence depuis see origines jusqu'`a la
domination des Medici (9 vols., Paris, 1877-90) HARTWIG, Quellen
und Forschungen zur aelteren Geschichte der Stadt Florenz
(Marburg, 1878), Much important material, both ecclesiastical
and civil, for the medieval history of Florence, is found in
MURATORI'S famous collection of medieval Italian annals and
chronicles: Scriptores Rerum Itahcarum, 28 folio volumes (Milan,
1723-1751; new ed. small quarto, 1900 sqq.).
MISCELLANEOUS:--YRIARTE, Florence, l'histoire les Medicis les
humanistes lea lettres, tea arts (Paris, 1880), tr. (London,
1882); KLEINPAUL, Florenz in Wort und Bud (Leipzig, 1888);
MORENI, Notizie istoriche dei contorni di Firenze (Florence,
1790-96); OLIPHANT The Makers of Florence, Dante, Giotto,
Savonarota and their City (London, 1880) E. M. CLERKE, Florence
in the Time of Dante in Dublin Review (1879), LXXXV, 279, The
writings of Ruskin (1819-1900) on Italian art abound with
studies and impressions of the Florentine artists. SYMONDS, The
Age of the Renaissance (London, 1882--) deals at great length
with the literary and political figures of Florentine history in
the fifteenth century; in ecclesiastical matters he is not
unfrequently prejudiced, insular, and unduly harsh. The German
writings of VON REUMONT have also done much to make better known
the medieval influence and prestige of the great city by the
Arno.
U. BENIGNI
Council of Florence
The Council of Florence
The Seventeenth Ecumenical Council was, correctly speaking, the
continuation of the Council of Ferrara, transferred to the
Tuscan capital because of the pest; or, indeed, a continuation
of the Council of Basle, which was convoked in 1431 by Martin V.
In the end the last-named assembly became a revolutionary
conciliabulum, and is to be judged variously, according as we
consider the manner of its convocation, its membership, or its
results. Generally, however, it is ranked as an ecumenical
council until the decree of dissolution in 1437. After its
transfer to Ferrara, the first session of the council was held
10 Jan., 1438. Eugene IV proclaimed it the regular continuation
of the Council of Basle, and hence its ecumenical character is
admitted by all.
The Council of Constance (1414-18) had seen the growth of a
fatal theory, based on the writings of William Durandus
(Guillaume Durant), John of Paris, Marsiglio of Padua, and
William of Occam, i.e. the conciliar theory that proclaimed the
superiority of the council over the pope. It was the outcome of
much previous conflict and embitterment; was hastily voted in a
time of angry confusion by an incompetent body; and, besides
leading eventually to the deplorable articles of the "Declaratio
Cleri Gallicani" (see GALLICANISM), almost provoked at the time
new schisms. Influenced by this theory, the members of the
Council of Constance promulgated in the thirty-fifth general
session (9 October, 1417) five decrees, the first being the
famous decree known as "Frequens", according to which an
ecumenical council should be held every ten years. In other
words, the council was henceforth to be a permanent,
indispensable institution, that is, a kind of religious
parliament meeting at regular intervals, and including amongst
its members the ambassadors of Catholic sovereigns; hence the
ancient papal monarchy, elective but absolute, was to give way
to a constitutional oligarchy.
While Martin V, naturally enough, refused to recognize these
decrees, he was unable to make headway openly against a movement
which he considered fatal. In accordance, therefore, with the
decree "Frequens" he convoked an ecumenical council at Pavia for
1423, and later, yielding to popular opinion, which even many
cardinals countenanced, summoned a new council at Basle to
settle the difficulties raised by the anti-Hussite wars. A Bull
of 1 Feb., 1431, named as president of the council Giuliano
Cesarini, Cardinal of Sant' Angelo, whom the pope had sent to
Germany to preach a crusade against the Hussites. Martin V died
suddenly (20 February, 1431), before the Bull of convocation and
the legatine faculties reached Cesarini. However, the new pope,
Eugene IV (Gabriele Condolmieri), confirmed the acts of his
predecessor with the reservation that further events might cause
him to revoke his decision. He referred probably to the reunion
of the Greek Church with Rome, discussed between Martin V and
the Byzantine emperor (John Palaeologus), but put off by reason
of the pope's death. Eugene IV laboured most earnestly for
reunion, which he was destined to see accomplished in the
Council of Ferrara-Florence. The Council of Basle had begun in a
rather burlesque way. Canon Beaupere of Besanc,on, who had been
sent from Basle to Rome, gave the pope an unfavourable and
exaggerated account of the temper of the people of Basle and its
environs. Eugene IV thereupon dissolved the council before the
close of 1431, and convoked it anew at Bologna for the summer of
1433, providing at the same time for the participation of the
Greeks. Cesarini, however, had already opened the council of
Basle, and now insisted vigorously that the aforesaid papal act
should be withdrawn. Yielding to the aggressive attitude of the
Basle assembly, whose members proclaimed anew the conciliar
theory, Eugene IV gradually modified his attitude towards them,
and exhibited in general, throughout these painful dissensions,
a very conciliatory temper.
Many reform-decrees were promulgated by the council, and, though
never executed, contributed towards the final rupture.
Ultimately, the unskilful negotiations of the council with the
Greeks on the question of reunion moved Eugene IV to transfer it
to Ferrara. The embassy sent from Basle to Constantinople
(1435), Giovanni di Ragusa, Heinrich Henger, and Simon Freron,
insisted obstinately on holding at Basle the council which was
to promote the union of the two Churches, but in this matter the
Byzantine Emperor refused to give way. With all the Greeks he
wished the council to take place in some Italian city near the
sea, preferably in Southern Italy. At Basle the majority
insisted, despite the Greeks, that the council of reunion should
be convoked at Avignon, but a minority sided with the Greeks and
was by them recognized as the true council. Hereupon Eugene IV
approved the action of the minority (29 May, 1437), and for this
was summoned to appear before the council. He replied by
dissolving it on 18 September. Wearied of the obstinacy of the
majority at Basle, Cardinal Cesarini and his adherents then
quitted the city and went to Ferrara, whither Eugene IV, as
stated above, had transferred the council by decree of 30
December, 1437, or 1 January, 1438.
The Ferrara Council opened on 8 January, 1438, under the
presidency of Cardinal Niccolo Albergati, whom the pope had
commissioned to represent him until he could appear in person.
It had, of course, no other objects than those of Basle, i.e.
reunion of the Churches, reforms, and the restoration of peace
between Christian peoples. The first session of the council took
place 10 January, 1438. It declared the Council of Basle
transferred to Ferrara, and annulled in advance any and all
future decrees of the Basle assembly. When Eugene IV heard that
the Greeks were nearing the coast of Italy, he set off (24
January) for Ferrara and three days later made his solemn entry
into the city. The manner of voting was first discussed by the
members of the council. Should it be, as at Constance, by
nations (nationes), or by committees (commissiones)? It was
finally decided to divide the members into three estates:
+ the cardinals, archbishops, and bishops;
+ the abbots and prelates;
+ the doctors and other members.
In order that the vote of any estate might count, it was
resolved that a majority of two-thirds should be required, and
it was hoped that this provision would remove all possibility of
the recurrence of the regrettable dissensions at Constance. At
the second public session (15 February) these decrees were
promulgated, and the pope excommunicated the members of the
Basle assembly, which still continued to sit. The Greeks soon
appeared at Ferrara, headed by Emperor John Palaeologus and
Joasaph, the Patriarch of Constantinople, and numbered about
seven hundred. The solemn sessions of the council began on 9
April, 1438, and were held in the cathedral of Ferrara under the
presidency of the pope. On the Gospel side of the altar rose the
(unoccupied) throne of the Western Emperor (Sigismund of
Luxemburg), who had died only a month previously; on the Epistle
side was placed the throne of the Greek Emperor. Besides the
emperor and his brother Demetrius, there were present, on the
part of the Greeks, Joasaph, the Patriarch of Constantinople;
Antonius, the Metropolitan of Heraclea; Gregory Hamma, the
Protosyncellus of Constantinople (the last two representing the
Patriarch of Alexandria); Marcus Eugenicus of Ephesus; Isidore
of Kiev (representing the Patriarch of Antioch); Dionysius,
Bishop of Sardes (representing the Patriarch of Jerusalem);
Bessarion, Archbishop of Nicaea; Balsamon, the chief
chartophylax; Syropulos, the chief ecclesiarch, and the Bishops
of Monembasia, Lacedaemon, and Anchielo. In the discussions the
Latins were represented principally by Cardinal Giuliano
Cesarini and Cardinal Niccolo Albergati; Andrew, Archbishop of
Rhodes; the Bishop of Forl`i; the Dominican John of
Turrecremata; and Giovanni di Ragusa, provincial of Lombardy.
Preliminary discussions brought out the main points of
difference between the Greeks and the Latins, viz. the
Procession of the Holy Spirit, the azymes, purgatory, and the
primacy. During these preliminaries the zeal and good intentions
of the Greek Emperor were evident. Serious discussion began
apropos of the doctrine of purgatory. Cesarini and Turrecremata
were the chief Latin speakers, the latter in particular engaging
in a violent discussion with Marcus Eugenicus. Bessarion,
speaking for the Greeks, made clear the divergency of opinion
existing among the Greeks themselves on the question of
purgatory. This stage of the discussion closed on 17 July,
whereupon the council rested for a time, and the Greek Emperor
took advantage of the respite to join eagerly in the pleasures
of the chase with the Duke of Ferrara.
When the council met again (8 Oct., 1438), the chief (indeed,
thenceforth the only) subject of discussion was the Filioque.
The Greeks were represented by Bessarion, Marcus Eugenicus,
Isidore of Kiev, Gemistus Plethon, Balsamon, and Kantopulos; on
the Latin side were Cardinals Cesarini and Niccolo Albergati,
the Archbishop of Rhodes, the Bishop of Forl`i, and Giovanni di
Ragusa. In this and the following fourteen sessions, the
Filioque was the sole subject of discussion. In the fifteenth
session it became clear that the Greeks were unwilling to
consent to the insertion of this expression in the Creed,
although it was imperative for the good of the church and as a
safeguard against future heresies. Many Greeks began to despair
of realizing the projected union and spoke of returning to
Constantinople. To this the emperor would not listen; he still
hoped for a reconciliation, and in the end succeeded in
appeasing the heated spirits of his partisans. Eugene IV now
announced his intention of transferring the council to Florence,
in consequence of pecuniary straits and the outbreak of the pest
at Ferrara. Many Latins had already died, and of the Greeks the
Metropolitan of Sardis and the entire household of Isidore of
Kiev were attacked by the disease. The Greeks finally consented
to the transfer, and in the sixteenth and last session at
Ferrara the papal Bull was read, in both Latin and Greek, by
which the council was transferred to Florence (January, 1439).
The seventeenth session of the council (the first at Florence)
took place in the papal palace on 26 February. In nine
consecutive sessions, the Filioque was the chief matter of
discussion. In the last session but one (twenty-fourth of
Ferrara, eighth of Florence) Giovanni di Ragusa set forth
clearly the Latin doctrine in the following terms: "the Latin
Church recognizes but one principle, one cause of the Holy
Spirit, namely, the Father. It is from the Father that the Son
holds his place in the 'Procession' of the Holy Ghost. It is in
this sense that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father, but He
proceeds also from the Son." In the last session, the same
theologian again expounded the doctrine, after which the public
sessions were closed at the request of the Greeks, as it seemed
useless to prolong further the theological discussions. At this
juncture began the active efforts of Isidore of Kiev, and, as
the result of further parleys, Eugene IV submitted four
propositions summing up the result of the previous discussion
and exposing the weakness of the attitude of the Greeks. As the
latter were loath to admit defeat, Cardinal Bessarion, in a
special meeting of the Greeks, on 13 and 14 April, 1439,
delivered his famous discourse in favour of reunion, and was
supported by Georgius Scholarius. Both parties now met again,
after which, to put an end to all equivocation, the Latins drew
up and read a declaration of their faith in which they stated
that they did not admit two "principia" in the Trinity, but only
one, the productive power of the Father and the Son, and that
the Holy Ghost proceeds also from the Son. They admitted,
therefore, two hypostases, one action, one productive power, and
one product due to the substance and the hypostases of the
Father and the Son. The Greeks met this statement with an
equivocal counter-formula, whereupon Bessarion, Isidore of Kiev,
and Dortheus of Mitylene, encouraged by the emperor, came out
strongly in favour of the ex filio.
The reunion of the Churches was at last really in sight. When,
therefore, at the request of the emperor, Eugene IV promised the
Greeks the military and financial help of the Holy See as a
consequence of the projected reconciliation, the Greeks declared
(3 June, 1439) that they recognized the procession of the Holy
Ghost from the Father and the Son as from one "principium"
(arche) and from one cause (aitia). On 8 June, a final agreement
was reached concerning this doctrine. The Latin teaching
respecting the azymes and purgatory was also accepted by the
Greeks. As to the primacy, they declared that they would grant
the pope all the privileges he had before the schism. An
amicable agreement was also reached regarding the form of
consecration in the Mass (see EPIKLESIS). Almost simultaneously
with these measures the Patriarch of Constantinople died, 10
June; not, however, before he had drawn up and signed a
declaration in which he admitted the Filioque, purgatory, and
the papal primacy. Nevertheless the reunion of the Churches was
not yet an accomplished fact. The Greek representatives insisted
that their aforesaid declarations were only their personal
opinions; and as they stated that it was still necessary to
obtain the assent of the Greek Church in synod assembled,
seemingly insuperable difficulties threatened to annihilate all
that had so far been achieved. On 6 July, however, the famous
decree of union (Laetentur Coeli), the original which is still
preserved in the Laurentian Library at Florence, was formally
announced in the cathedral of that city. The council was over,
as far as the Greeks were concerned, and they departed at once.
The Latin members remained to promote the reunion with the other
Eastern Churches--the Armenians (1439), the Jacobites of Syria
(1442), the Mesopotamians, between the Tigris and the Euphrates
(1444), the Chaldeans or Nestorians, and the Maronites of Cyprus
(1445). This last was the concluding public act of the Council
of Florence, the proceedings of which from 1443 onwards took
place in the Lateran palace at Rome.
The erudition of Bessarion and the energy of Isidore of Kiev
were chiefly responsible for the reunion of the Churches as
accomplished at Florence. The question now was to secure its
adoption in the East. For this purpose Isidore of Kiev was sent
to Russia as papal legate and cardinal, but the Muscovite
princes, jealous of their religious interdependence, refused to
abide by the decrees of the Council of Florence. Isidore was
thrown into prison, but afterwards escaped and took refuge in
Italy. Nor was any better headway made in the Greek Empire. The
emperor remained faithful, but some of the Greek deputies,
intimidated by the discontent prevailing amongst their own
people, deserted their position and soon fell back into the
surrounding mass of schism. The new emperor, Constantine,
brother of John Palaeologus, vainly endeavoured to overcome the
opposition of the Byzantine clergy and people. Isidore of Kiev
was sent to Constantinople to bring about the desired acceptance
of the Florentine "Decretum Unionis" (Laetentur Coeli), but,
before he could succeed in his mission, the city fell (1453)
before the advancing hordes of Mohammed II.
One advantage, at least, resulted from the Council of Florence:
it proclaimed before both Latins and Greeks that the Roman
pontiff was the foremost ecclesiastical authority in
Christendom; and Eugene IV was able to arrest the schism which
had been threatening the Western Church anew (see BASLE, COUNCIL
OF). This council was, therefore, witness to the prompt
rehabilitation of papal supremacy, and facilitated, the return
of men like Aeneas Sylvius Piccolomini, who in his youth had
taken part in the Council of Basle, but ended by recognizing its
erroneous attitude, and finally became pope under the name Pius
II.
L. VAN DER ESSEN
Florence of Worcester
Florence of Worcester
English chronicler; all that is known of his personal history is
that he was a monk of Worcester and that he died in 1118. His
"Chronicon ex Chronicis" is the first attempt made in England to
write a universal chronicle from the creation onwards, but the
universal part is based entirely on the work of Marianus Scotus
an Irish monk who died at Mainz about 1082. To this Florence
added a number of references to English history taken from Bede,
the "Anglo-Saxon Chronicle", and various biographies. The
portions borrowed from the "Chronicle" are of value because he
used a version which has not been preserved. Florence begins to
be an independent authority in 1030, and his "Chronicle" goes
down to 1117; it is annalistic in form, but a very useful record
of events. John, another monk of Worcester, continued the
"Chronicon" to 1141, and other writers took it down to 1295.
F.F. URQUHART
St. Florentina
St. Florentina
Virgin; born towards the middle of the sixth century; died about
612. The family of St. Florentina furnishes us with a rare
example of lives genuinely religious, and actively engaged in
furthering the best interests of Christianity. Sister of three
Spanish bishops in the time of the Visigothic dominion (Leander,
Isidore, and Fulgentius), she consecrated her virginity to God,
and all four have been canonized by the Church. Florentina was
born about the middle of the sixth century, being younger than
her brother Leander, later Archbishop of Seville, but older than
Isidore, who succeeded Leander as archbishop of the same see.
Before his elevation to the episcopal dignity, Leander had been
a monk, and it was through his influence that Florentina
embraced the ascetic life. She associated with herself a number
of virgins, who also desired to forsake the world, and formed
them into a religious community. Later sources declare their
residence to have been the convent of S. Maria de Valle near
Ecija (Astigis), of which city her brother Fulgentius was
bishop. In any case, it is certain that she had consecrated
herself to God before the year 600, as her brother Leander, who
died either in the year 600 or 601, wrote for her guidance an
extant work dealing with a nun's rule of life and with contempt
for the world ("Regula sive Libellus de institutione virginum et
de contemptu mundi ad Florentinam sororem", P.L. LXXII, 873
sqq.). In it the author lays down the rules according to which
cloistered virgins consecrated to God should regulate their
lives. He strongly advises them to avoid intercourse with women
living in the world, and with men, especially youths; recommends
strict temperance in eating and drinking, gives advice
concerning the reading of and meditation on Holy Scripture,
enjoins equal love and friendship for all those living together
in community, and exhorts his sister earnestly to remain true to
her holy state. Florentina regulated her life according to the
advice of her brother, entered with fervour into the spirit of
the religious life, and was honoured as a saint after her death.
Her younger brother Isidore also dedicated to her his work "De
fide catholica contra Jud=E6os", which he wrote at her request.
Florentina died early in the seventh century and is venerated as
the patroness of the diocese of Plasencia. Her feast falls on 20
June. The name is written Florentia in the Roman martyrology,
but Florentina is without doubt the correct form.
J. P. KIRSCH
Enrique Florez
Enrique Florez
Spanish theologian, archeologist, and historian; born at
Valladolid, 14 February, 1701; died at Madrid, 20 August, 1773.
While still very young (1715) he joined the Order of St.
Augustine, and thereafter he devoted his entire life to great
works on history and antiquities, which are valuable
contributions to the civil and ecclesiastical history of Spain.
He was one of the most learned men produced by Spain, and on
account of his learning enjoyed the respect and friendship of
the most eminent men of his time. His best-known and most
important work is "La Espana Sagrada, o teatro
geografico-historico de la Iglesia de Espana" (51 vols., Madrid,
1747----), a work following the same plan as the "Gallia
christiana" of Sainte-Marthe and the "Italia sacra" of Ughelli.
It is a history of the Church in Spain, with biographies of
bishops, and its value is enhanced by the insertion of ancient
documents which are not to be found elsewhere. But the work was
of such large scope that he did not live to finish his task, so
that, of the fifty-one volumes of which the history consists,
Florez wrote and published only a little more than half
(twenty-nine volumes), the rest being written and published
after his death by two other Augustinians, Fathers Risco and
Fernandez. This and other works of Father Florez are enriched by
carefully made illustrations which serve still further to
increase their value. In 1743 he published his historical work,
the curious "Llave historial", a work similar to the French "Art
de vorifier les dates", but having the advantage of priority
over the latter, which did not appear until 1750. This book
passed through several later editions in 1774, 1786, and 1790.
It did not, however, add much to the literary fame of its
author. Father Florez had pursued studies in numismatics and
published "Espana carpetana; medallas de las colonias,
municipios, y pueblos antiguos de Espana" (3 vols., Madrid,
1757), dealing with the history of Spain when that country was
occupied by the Romans. Other works of Florez were "Cursus
Theologiae" (5 vols., Madrid, 1732-38), one of his earlier
works, and "Memorias de las reynas Catolicas (2 vols., Madrid,
1761, 1770, and 1779), a genealogical history of the royal house
of Leon and Castile. Mendez, Noticia de la Vida y Escritos de
Enrique Florez (Madrid, 1780).
VENTURA FUENTES
Jeanne-Pierre Claris, Chevalier de Florian
Jeanne-Pierre Claris, Chevalier de Florian
Born at the chateau of Florian (Gard), 6 March, 1755; died at
Sceaux, 13 September, 1794. An orphan at an early age, he was
brought up by his grandfather and studied at St-Hippolyte. At
ten years of age he was taken by one of his uncles who was
related to Voltaire, to the chateau of Ferney. The influence of
the philosopher was already beginning to be felt by the child
when he was sent in 1768 to the Duke of Penthievre, to act as a
page. His sojourn at the chateau of Anet was very beneficial to
him. Not only did the duke interest himself in his studies, and
direct his readings, but he gave him good advice and made him
promise that he would never write except with reserve and
decency. Upon leaving the service of the Duke of Penthievre, he
entered the military school at Bapaume, obtained a commission in
the dragoons of Penthievre, but soon abandoned the army for
literature and began to write comedies. He was elected to the
Academie Franc,aise in 1788. Arrested at Sceaux in 1793, he owed
his life to the death of Robespierre, but he outlived the
terrors of his imprisonment only a short time. To modern
readers, Florian is chiefly known as the author of pretty fables
well suited as reading for the young, but his contemporaries
praised him also for his poetical and pastoral novels. He was
the Boucher and the Watteau of the literature of the eighteenth
century and it is remarkable that some of his graceful and
delicate works were written in the midst of the Revolution. The
list of his works is long. Worthy of mention are: two pastoral
novels, "Galatee" and "Estelle"; two poetical novels, "Numa
Pompilius" and "Gonzalve de Cordoue"; three volumes of comedies,
the principal being "Les Deux Billets", "Le Bon Menage", "Le Bon
Pere", "Jeannot et Colin"; two volumes of short stories, a few
religious poems, like "Ruth" and "Tobie", etc. Florian was very
fond of Spain and its literature, doubtless owing to the
influence of his mother, Gilette de Salgue, who was a Castilian.
He was loved by his contemporaries as well for his character as
for his writings, and he was much praised for his charity.
LOUIS N. DELAMARRE
The Florians
The Florians
(Floriacenses), an altogether independent order, and not, as
some consider, a branch of the Cistercians; it was founded in
1189 by the Abbot Joachim of Flora (q.v.), by whom its
constitutions were drawn up. Besides preserving a number of
Cistercian observances, the founder added to the austerities of
Citeaux. The Florians went barefoot; their habits were white and
very coarse. Their Breviary differed in the distribution of
Offices from that of Citeaux. The constitutions were approved by
Pope Celestine III in 1196. The order spread rapidly, soon
numbering as many as thirty-five monasteries, but it seems not
to have extended beyond Italy. In 1470 the regular abbots were
replaced by commendatory abbots, but the abuses of this regime
hastened the decline of the order. In 1505 the Abbey of Flora
and its affiliated monasteries were united to the Order of
Citeaux. In 1515 other Florian monasteries united themselves to
the Grande Chartreuse or to the Dominicans, and in 1570, after a
century under the regime of commendatory abbots, not a single
independent monastery remained, and the Order of Flora had
ceased to exist. Under the Abbot of Flora were also four
monasteries of religious women, who followed the Florian rule.
EDMOND M. OBRECHT
Florida
Florida
The Peninsular or Everglade State, the most southern in the
American Union and second largest east of the Mississippi, lies
between parallels 24DEG 38' and 31DEG N. latitude and meridians
79DEG 48' and 87DEG 38' W. longitude. Its name, commemorative of
its discovery by Ponce de Leon at Eastertide (Sp. Pascua
florida), 1513, or less probably descriptive of the verdant
aspect of the country, was originally applied to territory
extending northward to Virginia and westward indefinitely from
the Atlantic. Florida is bounded north by Alabama and Georgia,
east by the Atlantic, south by the Straits of Florida and Gulf
of Mexico, and west by the Gulf and the Perdido River. It
contains 58,680 sq. miles, 4440 being lake and river area.
Politically, the State is divided into forty-six counties,
geographically into the peninsular section, stretching 450 miles
north and south, average width 95 miles, and the continental or
northern portion, measuring 400 miles from Alabama to the
Atlantic, mean width 65 miles. Its eastern coast-line,
comparatively regular, is 470 miles long; it is paralleled
almost its entire length by sand reefs which enclose an inland
waterway, and its outline is prolonged in the chain of coral and
sandy islets known as the Florida Keys, which extend 200 miles
in a south-westerly direction, terminating in the Tortugas. Over
the Keys an extension of the Florida East Coast Railroad from
the mainland to Key West is in course of construction. The
deep-water ports are Fernandina, Jacksonville, and Key West. The
Gulf coast-line, sinuous in conformation, measures 675 miles;
the chief ports are Tampa, Apalachicola, and Pensacola.
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
The Everglades, often erroneously described as swamp-lands, form
the characteristic feature of Southern Florida. They consist
mainly of submerged saw-grass plains extending 130 by 70 miles,
studded with numerous islands which produce a semi-tropical
jungle-growth. The surface water, ordinarily about knee-deep,
pure, potable, and abounding in fish, has a perceptible
southbound current. A limestone substratum occasionally appears
through a bedbottom of vegetable mould. While subterranean
sources of supply are contributory, the inundation chiefly
results from the overflow of Lake Okeechobee (1200 sq. miles),
whose rock-rimmed shores, 18 feet above sea-level, exceed by 10
feet the general elevation of the Everglades. North of the lake,
extending through the counties of De Soto, Manatee, Osceola, and
Brevard, lie vast tracts of prairie or savanna land with large
swamp areas. This is the cattle region of Florida. Farther
north, and embracing the counties of Polk, Lake, Orange, Sumter,
Marion, and Alachua, is the fertile and picturesque rolling
country of the central ridge with a general altitude of 200, and
elevations approaching 300 feet above sea-level. This is the
lake region; Lakes Kissimmee, Tohopekaliga, Apopka, Harris, and
George are chief amongst thousands. The extensive coastal
plains, comprising the entire area of the Gulf and Atlantic
seaboard counties, are low-lying sandy tracts, monotonously
level and frequently marshy. These constitute the pine region of
Florida. The northern portion of middle Florida, between the
Suwannee and Apalachicola Rivers, while corresponding in general
altitude and topography to the central ridge, differs widely
from all other parts of the State. Red clay and loam of
surpassing fertility replace the elsewhere prevalent thin sandy
soils, while the featureless aspect of boundless pine plains and
the recurrent sameness of undulating landscape are replaced by a
rare exuberance and diversity of highland, plain, lake, and
woodland scenery. Florida is an exceedingly well-wooded and
well-watered State. Pine, cypress, cedar, oak, magnolia,
hickory, and sweet gum everywhere abound, while there are good
supplies of rarer hardwoods and semi-tropical varieties. There
are, including the East Coast Canal nearing completion, nearly
2000 miles of navigable waterways. The chief rivers flowing into
the Atlantic are: St. Mary's, forming part of the northern
boundary; St. John's, 300 miles long, navigable for 200 miles;
Indian River, properly a salt-water lagoon or sound, forming
part of the East Coast Canal. The Caloosahatchee, Peace,
Manatee, Withlacoochee, Suwannee, Ocilla, Ocklockonee,
Apalachicola, Choctawhatchee, Yellow River, Escambia, and
Perdido empty into the Gulf. The Kissimmee enters Lake
Okeechobee. Characteristic of the State are its immense mineral
springs: Silver, Wakulla, Chipola, Green Cove, and White Springs
are the principal. The remarkably mild and agreeable climate of
Florida makes it a favourite winter resort. The average annual
temperature ranges from 68DEG at Pensacola to 70DEG at Key West;
extremes of heat or cold are rarely experienced; the annual
rainfall is about 60 inches.
RESOURCES
Agriculture
Diversity of product, rather than abundance of yield, is
noticeable. Besides semi-tropical productions, all varieties
common in higher latitudes, except a few cereals, may be
profitably cultivated in Florida. The soil, exclusive of the
impartially distributed fertile hammock lands, i. e. limited
areas enriched by decomposed vegetable deposit, is excessively
sandy and rather poor in quality, yet surprisingly responsive to
cultivation. Even where the soil is not especially prolific the
warm, humid climate stimulates a rapid and vigorous plant
growth. In 1905, 31,233 farms were operated by whites, 14,231 by
negroes, 20 by others; farm acreage, 4,758,874; 1,621,362 acres
being improved. Value of farms, $51,464,124; operating expenses,
$3,914,296; products, $40,131,814; field crops, $13,632,641;
fruit crops, $5,423,390; live stock, $14,731,521. Crops in order
of value: cotton, 282,078 acres, 80,485 bales, value $4,749,351;
corn, 455,274 acres, 4,888,958 bushels, value $3,315,965;
peanuts, sweet potatoes, tomatoes, beans, white potatoes,
tobacco, celery, hay, watermelons, oats, lettuce, cabbage,
cucumbers. The mort valuable fruit crop was the orange:
1,768,944 bearing trees, producing 2,961,195 boxes, value
$3,353,609; followed in order of value by pineapples,
grapefruit, strawberries, and peaches. Live stock included
36,131 horses, 19,331 mules, 69 asses, 1,010,454 cattle, 604,742
swine, 115324 sheep, 33,150 goats.
Commerce and Industries
The report for the last statistical year shows a remarkable
increase in commercial and industrial activities; 1906
manufacturing establishments, capital $42,157,080, paid
$18,048,599 to 52,345 wage-earners; value of manufactured
products, $53,506,154. The leading industries and value of
annual output are: cigarmaking, about $15,000,000 (returns
incomplete); lumber, $15,210,916; naval stores, $10,196,327;
phosphate, $6,601,000. The value of exports (overland being
about as much more, not included) was $62,655,559 for 1906,
cigars comprising one-third this amount, the remainder being
almost equally divided between lumber, naval stores, and
phosphate; the value of imports was $6,654,546. The fisheries of
the west coast and sponge industry of the Keys are important,
giving employment to 6000 men and yielding an annual product
valued at $1,500,000. The total assessed valuation of taxable
property in the State was (1904) $111,333,735; State debt,
$601,567. On 1 March, 1908, eighteen railroads, with a total
mileage of 4104, main track 2948, miles, were in operation.
HISTORY
The landing of Ponce de Leon on the shores of Florida probably
on the Sunday after Easter, 3 April, 1513, is the first
positively authenticated instance of the presence of Europeans
on the mainland of the United States. This expedition, which
popular narrative invests with romantic glamour, was undertaken
according to the royal patent of authorization "to discover and
people the island of Bimini". Ponce named the land Florida in
honour of the Easter festival, set up a stone cross with an
inscription, and impressed with the hostile character of the
natives, returned after six months' exploration to Porto Rico.
His attempt to establish a colony in 1521 was doomed to speedy
failure. The voyages of Miruelo (1516), Cordova (1517), Pineda
(1519), Ayllon (1520), and Gomez (1524) accomplished little
beyond establishing the fact that Florida was not an island but
part of a vast continent. The disastrous outcome of the
expeditions of Panfilo Narvaez (1527-28), of Hernando de Soto
(1538-43), and of Tristan de Luna (1559-61) are well-known
episodes in the early history of America. On the failure of
Ribault's French colony, founded at Port Royal (1562), Rene de
Laudonniere planted the new settlement of Fort Caroline at the
mouth of St. John's River (1564). Pedro Menendez de Aviles, the
foremost naval commander of his day, learning that Ribault had
left France with reinforcements and supplies for the new colony,
set out to intercept him and banish for ever French Huguenots
from the land that belonged by right of discovery to Catholic
Spain. Menendez never undertook an enterprise and failed. He
reached the harbour of St. Augustine 28 August, 1565, naming it
for the saint of the day. The founding of the oldest city in the
United States merits a brief description. After devoting a week
to reconnoitring, Menendez entered the harbour on 6 September.
Three companies of soldiers were sent ashore under two captains,
to select a site and begin a fort. On 8 September Menendez
landed, and amid the booming of artillery and the blast of
trumpets the standard of Castile and Leon was unfurled. The
chaplain, Father Lopez de Mendoza, carrying a cross and followed
by the troops, proceeded to meet the general who advanced to the
cross, which he kissed on bended knee as did those of his staff.
The solemn Mass of Our Lady's Nativity was then offered on a
spot which was ever afterward called Nombre de Dios. On 20 Sept.
Fort Caroline was taken by surprise, only women and children
being spared. The merciless slaughter of Ribault and his
shipwrecked companions by Menendez a few days subsequently is an
indelible stain on a singularly noble record. The story, so
assiduously copied by successive historiographers, that Aviles
hanged some of his prisoners on trees and attached the
inscription No por franceses sino por Luteranos, is an
apocryphal embellishment (see Spanish Settlements, II, 178). Two
years later De Gourgues retaliated by slaughtering the Spanish
garrison at Fort Caroline.
The history of Florida during the first Spanish administration
(1565-1763) centres round St. Augustine, and is rather of
religious than political importance. English buccaneers under
Drake in 1586 and again under Davis in 1665 plundered and sacked
the town. Distrust and hostility usually prevailed between the
Spanish colonies and their northern English neighbours. Governor
Moore of South Carolina made an unsuccessful attempt in 1702 to
capture St. Augustine, and in 1704 laid waste the country of the
civilized Apalachee. Governor Oglethorpe of Georgia invaded
Florida in 1740, besieging St. Augustine with a large force but
was repulsed by the Spanish Governor Monteano and forced to
retreat. Spain ceded Florida to England in 1763. During the
English period great efforts were made to populate the country
and develop its resources, but religion suffered irreparably.
During the second Spanish occupation (1783-1821) some
unimportant military operations took place in West Florida under
General Andrew Jackson in 1814 and 1818. In consequence of the
treaty of 1819, the Americans took possession of Florida in
1821. In 1822 Florida became a territory of the United States,
William P. Duval being appointed first governor. The following
year Tallahassee was selected as the new capital. The refusal of
the warlike Seminoles to repair to reservations resulted in the
long, costly, and discreditable Indian War (1835-42), which came
to an end in the capture by treachery of Osceola.
Florida was admitted to Statehood in 1845. The State seceded
from the Union 10 January, 1861. In 1862 minor engagements
between the Federal and Confederate forces took place; the
Federal troops occupied Jacksonville, St. Augustine, and
Fernandina, but the Confederates, under General Finegan, gained
a decisive victory over the Union forces commanded by General
Seymour at Olustee in 1864. In proportion to population Florida
furnished more troops than any other Confederate State; they
took an honourable part in the campaigns of Tennessee and
Virginia, and bore a distinguished reputation for steadfast
endurance on the march and conspicuous gallantry on the
battlefield. Florida gave to the higher ranks of the Confederate
service three major-generals, Loring, Anderson, and Smith, and
the Brigadier-Generals Brevard, Bullock, Finegan, Miller, Davis,
Finley, Perry, and Shoup. The State was represented in the
Confederate Cabinet by Stephen H. Mallory, Secretary of the
Navy. If the war proved disastrous to Florida, the subsequent
reconstruction added despair to disaster when citizens witnessed
the control of public affairs pass into the hands of
unscrupulous adventurers. The ordinance of secession was
repealed in October, 1865, and a State government organized in
1866. In 1868 a new constitution having been adopted and the
Fourteenth Amendment ratified, Florida was readmitted into the
Union, but it was not till 1877, when Floridians obtained
political ascendancy, that a healthy industrial growth as well
as social and educational progress began to appear. The present
constitution was adopted in 1886. The discovery of rich
phosphate deposits in 1889 greatly improved economic conditions,
and the constantly growing popularity of Eastern Florida -- the
American Riviera -- as a winter resort contributes to the
general prosperity.
POPULATION
The colony of 600 Spaniards founded by Menendez at St. Augustine
in 1565 was the earliest permanent white settlement within the
present limits of the United States. Relinquishing fruitless
attempts to establish extensive settlements, Florida's Spanish
conquerors early subordinated purposes of colonization to
motives of military expediency, so that during an occupation of
two hundred years the white population remained limited to a few
stations of strategic importance. In 1648 the civilian
population of St. Augustine was represented by 300 families, and
in 1740, nearly a hundred years later, it numbered 2143. The
various Spanish garrisons usually aggregated about 2000 men. In
1763, when Florida passed under English rule, the entire Spanish
population of 5700 moved away. During the twenty years of
English occupancy there was a steady influx of settlers,
including numbers of loyalists from the revolted colonies. At
this period the so-called Minorcan colony was founded at New
Smyrna. During the second Spanish regime (1783-1821) immigration
continued and, when Florida came under the United States flag in
1821, increased rapidly. The first U. S. census of 1830 gives
the population at 34,730. For the thirty years following a
decennial increase of 60 per cent appears, the population in
1860 being 140,424. Since 1860 the increase per decade has
averaged 40 per cent. In 1900 the population was 528,542, and in
1905, 614,845, nearly 18 times that of 1830, showing in five
years an increase of 86,303, or 16 per cent. In 1900 whites
numbered 297,812, coloured 230,730, average number of
inhabitants per square mile 9.7. Following are detailed
statistics of 1908 (State census): white, 348,923; coloured,
265,737; other races, 185; average per square mile, 11.3.
Foreign born white, 22,409, comprising 5867 Cubans, 3120
Italians, 2589 West Indians, 2051 English, 1945 Spanish, 1699
Germans, 1059 Canadians, 610 Irish, and 3469 of other
nationalities. The Cuban population is concentrated mainly at
Tampa and Key West, Spanish and Italian at Tampa, West Indian of
both races at Key West; the other nationalities are scattered
broadly over the State. Nine counties exhibit a slightly
decreased population attributed to a shifting of negroes from
the farms. In twelve counties negroes outnumber whites. Leon
county has the largest percentage of coloured people, 14,880 out
of 18,883 total, or 78.8 per cent; Lee county the smallest, 399
out of 3961 total, or 10 per cent. Leon has 25.8 inhabitants per
square mile, Lee only 0.8; these figures are typical of racial
distribution of population throughout the State. Cities over
10,000: Jacksonville 35,301, Tampa (estimated) 28,000, Pensacola
21,505; and Key West 20,498.
EDUCATION
The organization of the Florida Educational Society in 1831 was
apparently the first attempt made to inaugurate a public school
system. It resulted in the establishment of a free school at St.
Augustine in 1832. During the ante-bellum period, owing to
general lack of interest, inefficiency of educational
legislation, and the prejudice that regarded public schools as
"pauper" schools, but little was accomplished for the cause of
popular education. In 1860 a few counties had organized public
school systems, but the advent of war, and particularly the
subsequent dismal process of reconstruction proved a serious
blow to educational progress. The constitutional convention of
1865 gave the subject scant recognition, but that of 1868
adopted in its constitution liberal provisions, which were
greatly amplified by the constitution of 1885. This constitution
established a permanent State school fund, consisting mainly of
proceeds of public land sales, State appropriations, and a
one-mill property tax, the interest of which was to be applied
to support public schools. This fund (1908) exceeds one million
dollars. Each county constitutes a school unit (but when
advisable special school districts may be formed) and is
authorized to levy a school tax of from 3 to 7 mills. Poll-tax
proceeds also revert to the county school fund. The governor,
secretary of state, attorney-general, State treasurer, and State
superintendent of public instruction form the State Board of
Education. County boards consist of a county superintendent and
three commissioners. There are twelve grades or years of
instruction, eight months constituting a school year. The school
age is six to twenty-one years. The constitution prescribes that
"white and coloured children shall not be taught in the same
school, but impartial provision shall be made for both".
Statistics from latest biennial report (1906) of state
superintendent show: total public schools, 2387; white 1720;
coloured 667; enrolment: white 81,473, or 66 per cent of school
population, coloured 48,992, or 52 per cent of school
population; total expenditure for school year ending June, 1906,
$1,020,674.95 for white schools, $200,752.27 for coloured
schools. There are 2495 white and 794 coloured teachers. The
report observes that while rapid progress has been accomplished
along educational lines, a comparison with more advanced States
shows that in Florida popular education of the masses is yet in
its initial stage. "One of the greatest hindrances to
educational progress at the present time is the scarcity, not
only of professionally trained teachers, but teachers of any
kind." This scarcity is ascribed to the inadequate remuneration
teachers receive.
The system of higher education fostered by the State was
reorganized by legislative act of 1905. Several existing
institutions were abolished, and in their stead were established
a State university for men, a State college for women, and a
coloured normal and industrial school in which co-education
prevails. These higher educational institutions receive generous
support. State appropriations in 1907 amounted to $600,000,
while annual subventions from the federal treasury aggregate
about $60,000. The University of the State of Florida,
Gainsville, includes a normal department, also a United States
Agricultural Experiment Station, under a separate managerial
staff. The university faculty numbers 15, Experiment Station
staff 14, enrolment (1908) 103. The Florida Female College,
Tallahassee, also includes a normal school, and has 22
professors and instructors and 240 students. The coloured normal
school, Tallahassee, reports a faculty of 24 and an enrolment of
307. Institutions of higher education under denominational
auspices: The John B. Stetson University (Baptist), Deland,
incorporated 1889, affiliated with Chicago University, 1898. Its
productive endowment funds amount to $225,000, while it has been
the recipient of munificent gifts and legacies; enrolment (1908)
520, faculty 49. Rollins College (undenominational evangelical),
Winter Park, incorporated 1885, possesses an endowment fund of
$200,000, faculty 20, enrolment 148. The Southern College
(Methodist), Southerland, founded 1902, faculty 19, enrolment
216. The Columbia College (Baptist), Lake City, was established
in 1907; its faculty numbers 12, enrolment 143. St. Leo College
(Catholic), St. Lee, incorporated 1889, is conducted by the
Benedictine Fathers, faculty 9, enrolment 75. The Presbyterian
College of Florida, Eustis, opened in 1905 and has at present 9
professors and 63 students. There is a business college located
at Tampa and two -- Massey's and Draughon's -- at Jacksonville.
Catholic institutions, beneath college grade but maintaining a
high standard of instruction, are the Academies of St. Joseph at
St. Augustine, Jacksonville, and Loretto -- the latter a boys'
preparatory school -- of the Holy Names at Tampa and Key West,
and of the Sisters of Mercy at Pensacola. The number of children
under Catholic care is 3704. Denominational institutions of high
grade for the education of negroes are the Cookman Institute
(Methodist), enrolment 487; the Edward Waters College
(Methodist); and the Florida Baptist College, all situated at
Jacksonville. In all the non-Catholic institutions co-education
obtains.
RELIGION
Early Missionary Efforts
The permanent establishment of the Christian Religion in what is
now the United States dates from the founding of St. Augustine
in 1565. The previous fifty years exhibit a record of heroic
though fruitless attempts to plant the cross on the soil of
Florida. The solicitude manifested by the Spanish Crown for the
conversion of the Indians was sincere and lasting, nor was there
ever wanting a plentiful supply of zealous Spanish missionaries
who brought to the spiritual subjugation of the Western World
the same steadfastness of purpose and unflinching courage that
achieved within so short a space the mighty conquests of Spanish
arms. Priests and missionaries accompanied Ponce (1521), Allyon
(1526), De Soto (1538), and De Luna (1559). In 1549 the
Dominican Father Luis Cancer de Barbastro, honoured as Apostle
of Central America and Protomartyr of Florida, in attempting to
establish a mission, was slain by hostile Indians near Tampa
Bay. Having secured Spanish supremacy by ruthlessly crushing out
the French and planting a permanent colony at St. Augustine in
1565, Menendez with indomitable energy and zeal devoted himself
to the evangelization of the Indians. Of the twenty-eight
priests who embarked with him from Spain, four only seem to have
reached Florida, of whom Martin Francisco Lopez de Mendoza
Grajales became first parish priest of St. Augustine, the first
established parish in the United States. Pending the arrival of
regular missionaries, Menendez appointed soldiers possessing the
necessary qualifications as religious instructors to the
Indians. The Jesuits were the first to enter the missionary
field; three were sent by St. Francis Borgia in 1566 and ten in
1568; the few who survived the martyrdom of their brethren were
recalled in 1572. In 1577 the Franciscans arrived. The good
progress made by 1597 was severely checked by a general massacre
of the missionaries instigated by a young chief chafing under
merited reprimand. In 1609 several Indian chiefs sought baptism
at St. Augustine, and the Florida missions entered the palmy
period of their existence, which lasted till well past the
middle of the century. In 1634 the Franciscan province of St.
Helena, with mother-house at St. Augustine, contained 44 Indian
missions, 35 missionaries, and 30,000 Catholic Indians. By 1674
evidences of decline begin to appear. Bishop Calderon found his
episcopal jurisdiction questioned by the friars, and although he
confirmed many Indians, he complained of the universal ignorance
of Christian doctrine. The arbitrary exactions of successive
governors provoked resentment and rebellion amongst the
Christian Indians, while the English foe on the northern border
menaced their very existence. In 1704 the blow fell. Burning,
plunder, carnage, and enslavement is the record of Moore's raid
amongst the Apalachee missions. Efforts at re-establishment
partially succeeded, there being in 1720 six towns of Catholic
Indians and several missions, but owing to the ravages of
persistent conflict between the Spanish and English colonies,
these in 1763 had languished to four missions with 136 souls.
The cession to England in 1763 resulted, not merely in the final
extinction of the missions, but in the complete obliteration of
Florida's ancient Catholicity.
Formation of Dioceses
St. Augustine began its existence as a regularly constituted
parish of the Diocese of Santiago de Cuba. Its church records,
dating from 1594, are preserved in the archives of the present
cathedral. The first recorded episcopal visitation was made by
Bishop Cabeza de Altamirano in 1606. In 1674 Bishop Gabriel Diaz
Vara Calderon visited the Floridian portion of his diocese; he
conferred minor orders on seven candidates, and during an
itinerary of eight months, extending to the Carolinian confines,
confirmed 13,152 persons, founded many mission churches, and
liberally supplied others. The permanent residence of
Bishops-Auxiliary Resino (1709-10), Tejada (1735-45), and Ponce
y Carasco (1751-55) at St. Augustine, shows that despite the
waning condition of the colony and missions at this period, the
Church in Florida was not deprived of episcopal care and
vigilance. Bishop Morell of Santiago, exiled from his see during
the English occupation of Havana (1662-63), remained four months
at St. Augustine, confirming 639 persons. When Florida in 1763
passed under English rule, freedom of worship was guaranteed,
but the illiberal interpretation of officials resulted in the
general exodus of Catholics, so that by 1765, the bi-centenary
year of the Church in Florida, a few defaced church buildings
presented the only evidence of its former Catholicity. Five
hundred survivors of the New Smyrna colony of 1400 Catholics,
natives of Mediterranean lands, settled at St. Augustine in 1776
and preserved the Faith alive through a trying epoch. In 1787
Florida became subject to the newly constituted See of St.
Christopher of Havana, and the following year Bishop Cyril de
Barcelona found the church at St. Augustine progressing
satisfactorily under the care of Fathers Hassett and O'Reilly,
who had arrived on the retrocession of Florida to Spain in 1783.
In 1793 Pius VI established the Diocese of Louisiana and the
Floridas, appointing the Right Rev. Luis Penalver y Cardenas,
with residence at New Orleans, as first bishop. After Bishop
Penalver's promotion to the Archbishopric of Guatemala in 1801,
no successor having been appointed, Louisiana, which was annexed
to the United States in 1803, came under the jurisdiction of
Bishop Carroll of Baltimore in 1806, the bishops of Havana
reassuming authority over Florida until the appointment of the
Rev. Michael Portier in 1825 to the new Vicariate of Alabama and
Florida. Bishop Portier undertook single-handed the work of his
vast vicariate, not having a single priest, until at his request
Bishop England of Charleston sent Father Edward Mayne to St.
Augustine in 1828. In 1850 the See of Savannah was created and
included that part of Florida which lies east of the
Apalachicola River; this was constituted a separate vicariate in
1857 under the Right Rev. Augustin Verot as vicar apostolic and
erected into the Diocese of St. Augustine in 1870, with Bishop
Verot, who had occupied the See of Savannah since 1861, as first
bishop. Bishop Verot's unwearied activity and zeal in promoting
religion and education soon bore fruit; schools were opened by
the Christian Brothers and the Sisters of Mercy in 1858, but the
outbreak of the Civil War frustrated all hopes of success. In
1866 the Sisters of St. Joseph were introduced from France, and
despite the most adverse conditions, they had several
flourishing schools and academies in operation before many
years. The era of progress inaugurated by Bishop Verot continued
under the administration of Bishop John Moore (1877-1901), whose
successor, the Right Rev. William John Kenny, was consecrated by
Cardinal Gibbons 18 May, 1902, in the historic cathedral of St.
Augustine. The Catholic population of the State, including 1750
coloured Catholics, is (1908) about 30,000. The Diocese of St.
Augustine, wholly included within the State, contains about
25,000 Catholics; there are 49 priests with 40 churches and
several missions, and 2897 young people under the care of
religious teaching orders. That portion of the State situated
west of the Apalachicola River forms part of the Diocese of
Mobile since 1829; the Catholic population is about 5000, there
are five churches with resident priests and 6 Catholic schools
with 807 pupils; Pensacola, founded 1696, is the Catholic
centre.
Other Religious Denominations
The Methodist Church South has the largest membership. The
Florida Conference was set off from the Georgia Conference in
1844. The session of December, 1907, reported 341 churches and
155 ministers; estimated membership 40,000. The Baptists report
35,021 total membership, 548 churches, 370 ministers. The
Episcopalian denomination, comprising the Diocese of Florida and
the Missionary District of Southern Florida, organized 1892, has
7737 communicants, about 12,000 total baptized, and 66
ministers. These three denominations display considerable
activity and efficiency in missionary and educational work. The
Baptist State Mission board supports 40 missionaries; while the
Episcopalians, with but 10 self-supporting parishes, maintain
nearly 200 missions, including 14 churches for negroes and 10
parish schools with 540 pupils. In 1894 the Episcopal Church
started mission work amongst the Seminole Indians of the
Everglades, who number about 300, but as the chiefs who are
arbiters of all individual rights have hitherto held aloof, the
result has been very discouraging. Presbyterians North and South
number 6500 with 95 ministers, Congregationalists 2500; other
denominations represented in the State are: Adventists,
Christians, Lutherans, Unitarians, Campbellites, Jews, Christian
Scientists, and Mormons. Reliable religious statistics of the
coloured people are difficult to obtain owing to multiplicity of
organizations and mobility of religious temperament. Five
distinct branches of Methodists report 635 preachers, 400
churches, and 7470 members. Baptist organizations approximate
the Methodists in strength, while the coloured membership of
other denominations is very small.
Florida Indians
The early explorers found the Indians distributed over the
entire peninsula. To the north-west the populous tribes of the
Apalachee inhabited the country watered by the Suwannee and
Apalachicola Rivers; the Timuquanans occupied the centre of the
peninsula, with numerous settlements along the St. John's; the
Calusa in the south-west ranged from Cape Sable to Tampa Bay; on
Biscayne Bay the small settlement of Tegestas seems to have come
originally from the Bahamas and contracted kinship with the
Calusa; along the Indian River south of Cape Canaveral lived the
Ays, also comparatively few in numbers and mentioned only in
connexion with early missionary labour, probably having become
absorbed in the Timuquanans under the unifying influence of
Christianity. Sufficient data for an approximate estimate of
population are wanting; probably the entire population of the
tribes mentioned exceeded 20,000 but not 40,000. These tribes
pertained ethnologically and linguistically to the great
Muskhogean or Creek family, though some philologists consider
the Timuquanan language, which "represents the acme of
polysynthesis", a distinct linguistic stock.
The Timuquanans lived in great communal houses, fortified their
villages, practised agriculture to some extent and a few rude
industries. They are described as being of fine physique,
intelligent, courageous, generally monogamous, very fond of
ceremonial, and much addicted to human sacrifice and
superstition. Their settlement near St. Augustine furnished the
first Indian converts, in all probability prior to the advent of
the Franciscan missionaries in 1577. In 1602 Governor Canc,o
estimated the number of Christians amongst them at 1200. A
catechism in the Timuquanan language by Father Francisco Pareja
was printed in Mexico in 1612 and a grammar in 1614 (reprinted
at Paris, 1886), besides other works. These were the first books
printed in any of our Indian tongues. The baptism of twelve
Timuquanan chiefs in 1609 at St. Augustine cleared the way for
the conversion of the whole nation to Christianity. English and
hostile Indian raids diminished their numbers (1685-1735), and
by 1763 they had all but disappeared. The Apalachee Indians,
closer related to the Creeks, resembled the neighbouring
Timuquanans in general disposition and manner of life. It is not
mentioned that they practised human sacrifice, and in other
respects, especially after their conversion to Christianity,
they exhibited a superiority of character over the other
Floridian tribes, being docile and tractable to religious
teaching and training. Towards Narvaez (1528) and De Soto (1539)
they assumed a surprisingly hostile demeanour, in view of the
ready response accorded subsequently to the efforts of the
missionaries. In 1595 Father Pedro de Chozas penetrated to Ocute
in the Apalachee country, and his mission proved so fruitful
that the Indians appealed in 1607 for additional missionaries,
and by 1640 the whole tribe was Catholic. The Apalachee country
was invaded and devastated by hostile Indians and English under
Moore in 1704. Of thirteen flourishing towns but one escaped
destruction, missionaries were tortured and slain, 1000
Christians were carried off to be sold as slaves, and of 7000
Christian Apalachee only 400 escaped. One of the last items
recorded of the tribe is the testimony of the French writer
Penicaut to the edifying piety with which a fugitive band that
had settled near Mobile adhered to the practices of religion.
The Calusa or Carlos Indians, with whom Menendez in 1566
endeavoured to establish friendship and alliance, in order to
pave the way to their conversion, showed a persistent spirit of
hostility to Christian teaching. They were cruel, crafty, though
recklessly brave, polygamous, and inveterately addicted to human
sacrifice. The Jesuit Father Rogel laboured fruitlessly amongst
them (1567-8). The Franciscans in 1697 were even less
successful. In 1743 the Jesuit Fathers Monaco and Alana, who
obtained some little success, described them as cruel, lewd, and
rapacious. The remnant of the tribe moved to the western
reservations about 1835. The Seminoles, also allied to the Creek
stock, came into Florida about 1750; very few of them became
Christians, as missionary activity ceased on the English
occupation in 1763. Their refusal to withdraw to reservations
resulted in the Indian War of 1835-42. On the conclusion of the
war 2000 were conveyed to Indian Territory. About 300, defying
every effort of the United States, retired to the almost
inaccessible recesses of the Everglades which their descendants
occupy to this day.
Legislation Directly Affecting Religion
Freedom of worship and liberty of conscience are by
constitutional provision guaranteed in perpetuity to the
citizens of Florida. The Declaration of Rights ordains (Sec. 5):
"The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and
worship shall forever be allowed in this State, and no person
shall be considered incompetent as a witness on account of his
religious opinions; but the liberty of conscience hereby secured
shall not be so construed as to justify licentiousness or
practices subversive of, or inconsistent with, the peace or
moral safety of the state or society." The constitution further
provides (Sec. 6) that no preference be given by law to any
church or religious sect, and forbids the subvention of public
funds in aid of any religious denomination or sectarian
institution. Wilful interruption or disturbance of "any assembly
of people met for the worship of God" is, through legislative
enactment (Gen. Stat. 3547), a penal offence. The religious
observance of Sunday is, by various prohibitory statutes,
indirectly enjoined. All business pursuits "either by manual
labor or with animal or mechanical power, except the same be
work of necessity" are forbidden on Sunday. Selling goods in
open store, the employment of servants, except in ordinary
household duty and necessary or charitable work, and the
discharge of fire-arms on Sunday are punishable offences. The
printing and sale of newspapers is specially exempted. Service
and execution of writs on Sunday (suitable provisions obviating
possible abuse of the statute being annexed) are declared null
and void. By legislative act of 1905, certain games and sports,
expressly baseball, football, bowling, and horse-racing, are
prohibited on Sunday. All electors upon registering must testify
under oath in form prescribed, that they are legally qualified
to vote, All State officials, on assuming office, are required
to take an oath of loyalty to the Federal and State
constitutions and governments, of legal qualification for
office, and of fidelity to duty. Testimony in the various courts
is to be given under oath. The officials authorized to
administer oaths are designated by statute. The issuance of
search-warrants is forbidden, except for probable cause, with
specification of names and places and supported by oath (Dec. of
Rights, 22); also all offences cognizable in Criminal Courts of
Record are to be prosecuted upon information under oath
(Constit., V, 28). By statutory provision (1731) a declaration
in judicial form may in all cases be substituted for an oath.
The days defined as legal holidays include Sunday, New Year's
Day, Christmas Day, and Good Friday. The use of prayer in the
Legislature is not sanctioned by legal provision, although it is
customary to appoint a chaplain and begin each session with
prayer.
Against open profanity and blasphemy it is enacted (Gen. Stat.
3542) that "whoever having arrived at the age of discretion
profanely curses or swears in any public street shall be
punished by fine not exceeding five dollars". Heavier penalties
are decreed against the use of indecent or obscene language, and
liberal statutory provision exists for the safeguarding of
public morality.
Churches, religious communities, charitable institutions, and
cemetery associations may become incorporated by complying with
the provisions of the general statutes regulating non-profitable
corporations. Churches, church lots, parsonages, and all
burying-grounds not held for speculative purposes are declared
exempt from taxation; property of literary, educational, and
charitable institutions actually occupied and used solely for
the specific purposes indicated is likewise exempt. Ministers of
the Gospel are by statute exempt from jury duty and military
service. All regularly ordained ministers in communion with some
church are authorized to solemnize the rites of the matrimonial
contract under the regulations prescribed by law. Marriages of
whites with negroes or persons of negro descent to the fourth
generation (one-eighth negro blood) are forbidden. The
prohibited degrees, besides the direct line of consanguinity,
include only brother and sister, uncle and niece, nephew and
aunt. Continuous absence of either spouse over sea or continual
absence for three years following voluntary desertion, with
presumption of demise, gives the other spouse legal right to
remarry. The statutory grounds for divorce are: consanguinity
within the degrees prohibited by law, natural impotence,
adultery not connived at or condoned, extreme cruelty, habitual
indulgence in violent and ungovernable temper, habitual
intemperance, wilful, obstinate, and continued desertion for one
year, divorce procured by defendant in another state or country,
and bigamy. To file a bill of divorce two years' residence (the
cause of adultery excepted) is conditional. Separation a mensa
et toro is not legally recognized; every divorce is a vinculo.
Special personal and local divorce legislation is
unconstitutional.
State aid is prohibited denominational schools. The law directs
every teacher "to labor faithfully and earnestly for the
advancement of the pupils in their studies, deportment and
morals, and to embrace every opportunity to inculcate, by
precept and by example, the principles of truth, honesty and
patriotism, and the practice of every Christian virtue". The
benevolent institutions maintained by the State include an
insane asylum situated at Chattahoochee, a school for the blind,
deaf, and dumb at St. Augustine, and a reform school for
youthful delinquents at Marianna. A Confederat